Novel Method to Formulate Humic Substances

ABSTRACT

A method of formulating novel humic material is disclosed comprising mixing one or more portions of Dimethylphenylpiperazinium (DMPP) with one or more portions of N—(N-butyl) thiophosphoric triamide (NBPT) with one or more portions of Isobutylidene-diurea (IBDU) with one or more portions of Polyaspartic Acid with one or more portions of Chitosan and a portion of Mycorrhizae and Rhizobia to form a portion of biostimulant material; obtaining a portion of seaweed harvest and crushing and drying said portion of seaweed to form a portion of seaweed powder; Obtaining a portion of leonardite and crushing said portion of leonardite to form a portion of humic raw material; mixing one or more portion of animal manure with one or more portion of stover with one or more portion of organic waste to form a portion of compositing mix and composting said compositing mix to form a portion of composted product; obtaining a portion of plant waste and subjecting said portion of plant waste through an anaerobic combustion to form a portion of bio char; mixing said portion of bio char with said portion of composted product with said portion of humic product to form a portion of humic processed material; adding a portion of artificial taggant to said humic processed material to form tagged humic product; mixing said tagged humic product with said portion of biostimulant material to form a portion of biostimulant humic product; adding a taggant to said portion of biostimulant humic product to form a portion of tagged biostimulant humic product; mixing one or more portion of phosphorus with a portion of potassium and a portion of nitrogen and a portion of trace minerals to form portion of raw fertilizer; mixing said portion of raw fertilizer with said portion of tagged biostimulant humic product to form a portion of tagged fertilized biostimulant humic product.

CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of, and claims benefit of priorityto, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/736,736, filed Jan. 7, 2020,which, in turn, was a continuation in part of, and claimed benefit ofpriority to, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/622,370, filed Feb. 13,2015, which are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety as iffully set forth herein.

TECHNICAL FIELD

The present disclosure relates to Humic substances technology, inparticular, a green gas credit applied humic substances.

BACKGROUND

The earth's atmosphere is a complex gaseous system that is essential tosupport life on planet Earth. The atmosphere shields the planet from theharsh conditions that exist in space. The earth's atmosphere largelydefines the planet's climate and acts like the glass in a greenhouse. Ina greenhouse, energy from the sun passes through the glass and isabsorbed by objects in the greenhouse including the plants and soil.Much of the absorbed energy is converted to heat, which warms thegreenhouse. The glass helps maintain the greenhouse warmth by trappingthis heat. While an estimated 31% of the energy received from the sun assunlight is reflected back to space by the earth's atmosphere andsurface (particularly those portions of the surface that are covered bysnow and ice), 20% is absorbed by the atmosphere, and the remaining 39%portion of incoming radiation is absorbed by the earth's oceans andland, where it is converted into heat, warming the surface of the earthand the air above it. On an ongoing basis, the earth's averagetemperature is determined by the overall balance between the amount ofenergy that is received from the sun, the amount of radiant heat that isdeveloped because of the atmosphere, and the amount that is reflectedback to space. Certain naturally occurring gases in the atmosphere helpto establish and maintain this balance. Water vapor is considered to bethe largest contributor to the natural greenhouse effect. Other gasesthat naturally occur in smaller quantities in the atmosphere alsocontribute to the natural greenhouse effect. These gases include carbondioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. This natural balance, however, canbe upset by a variety of factors including the overabundance of one ormore of the natural greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

The recent warming of the earth's climate has been largely attributed tohuman activity, primarily the release of greater amounts of carbondioxide and other greenhouse gases (each a “GHG”) into the atmosphere.These gases enhance the insulating properties of the atmosphere,reducing heat loss, thereby warming the planet. Continued emission ofthese gases is the primary cause for concern about climate change nowand into the immediate future. Particularly important is the emission ofcarbon dioxide, which is released through the combustion of carbon-basedfossil fuels. In some countries, over 80% of total national greenhousegas emissions are associated with the production or consumption offossil fuels for energy purposes. Some examples of GHGs are carbondioxide, methane, perfluorocarbons, nitrous oxide, sulfur hexafluoride,and hydroflurocarbons. The amount of global warming that a certain GHGcan produce is often measured as the “carbon dioxide equivalent”, thatis, in terms of the amount of warming potential that carbon dioxidewould produce.

A variety of strategies and policies have been proposed over the yearsby which the “carbon footprint”—that is, the amount of greenhouse gasemitted by a specific source—can be identified and reduced.

On a larger scale, governments have taken steps to limit emissions ofcarbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. The reduction of the emissionof greenhouse gases and global warming was a subject addressed at the1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. From thisConference, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Changeresulted. This Treaty called for protocols to take place from time totime, the most famous of which is the Kyoto Protocol. This Protocolcommitted countries that became parties to the Treaty to reducegreenhouse gas emission based on the premises that global warming isoccurring and the man-made carbon dioxide has caused it. Governmentshave also implemented a variety of measures to limit emissions of carbondioxide and other greenhouse gases and, in some cases, put taxes oncarbon emissions and higher taxes on fossil fuels.

A variety of individual and industrial strategies and policies have beenproposed over the years to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Individualsand companies are attempting to curb global warming by variousconservation measures, recycling programs, driving and flying less,using lower amounts of highly processed products and components, andsourcing product and components locally. Much of these commonly adoptedmeasures focus on reducing transportation and therefore the release ofcarbon dioxide and other gases from the combustion of fossil fuels toreduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, reductions in other economicsectors can produce significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.

The emissions from the agricultural sector are known to be verysubstantial. It is estimated that one fifth of all global GHG emissionsare currently due to agriculture. Forty percent of this amount comesfrom direct agricultural production, another forty percent is caused byagriculture's role in driving deforestation and the loss of peat andfires, and twenty percent is caused by the use of fossil fuels along theagricultural supply chain and for on-farm machinery. Direct agriculturalproduction emissions include two important greenhouse gases: nitrousoxide (N.sub.2O) and methane (CH.sub.4). Nitrous oxide is estimated tohave a global warming potential that is 310 times that of carbondioxide. Methane is estimated to have a global warming potential that is23 times that of carbon dioxide.

The causes of some of these large amounts of GHG emissions are known andtherefore may be susceptible to reduction. For example, 15% of directagricultural emissions are due to the use of synthetic fertilizers.Synthetic fertilizers are problematic because coal is often used in theproduction of this product, particularly in developing countries,instead of the more efficient natural gas. Also, farmers tend to overapply nitrogen fertilizers to crops as insurance against low yields.However, by applying large amounts of nitrogen fertilizer to crops, thepotent GHG nitrous oxide may be emitted similarly in large amounts.

Similarly, irrigation is also known to cause GHG emissions. The need toobtain and distribute water for crops in areas that do not have readysources of water requires that fossil fuels be used not only to buildbut also to operate the pumps and other components of the irrigationsystems.

The steps that can be taken to change current practices in theagricultural sector and reduce the GHG emissions by this sector areoften known. For example, a reduction in the over application ofsynthetic fertilizers can be realized if farmers adopt better accountingpractices by which they know how much fertilizer is needed for aparticular crop and when that amount has been applied. To illustrate, itis thought that China—considered, like the U.S., and to a lesser degree,India, and the E.U., to be a “hotspot” for nitrogen fertilizeroveruse—could reduce fertilizer application rates by 30 to 60 percentwithout harming yields. Switching to organic fertilizers can also helpsimply because lower amounts of fossil fuels are needed to produce them.

Better water management practices and the improvement of agriculturalsoils can similarly reduce the need for and constant operation ofirrigation systems and thereby GHG emissions. The steady growth of GHGemissions may also be curtailed if agricultural output is intensifiedrather than expanded. Expansion requires the conversion of more land toagricultural purposes. Such conversion can involve the deforestation ofland and thereby the destruction of a natural sink for carbon dioxide.Intensification, on the other hand, seeks to produce more with the sameamount of land. Intensification practices include changing the varietiesand breeds grown on the land, altering the substances used asfertilizers, and improving irrigation practices.

Even though many measures to reduce GHG emissions are known, farmersoften fail to adopt many of them. One such reason for the reluctance isthat at least some farmers may not appreciate that GHGs are airpollutants and air pollution can interfere with photosynthesis, stuntoverall plant growth, and ultimately lessen agricultural yields. Anotherreason is that the benefits that farmers can realize by changing theirpractices to produce reductions in GHG emissions are difficult toquantify in economic terms. To illustrate this point, anaturally-occurring substance, humate, will now be discussed.

Humates are considered to be the most widely distributed organicsubstance resulting from biosynthesis on the planet. Thesesubstances—found in soils, peat beds, and coal deposits and in varyingconcentrations in rivers, lakes, and oceans—result from thedecomposition of plant and animal matter. Given their diverse origins,humates are heterogeneous substances that may contain a variety oforganic components—including aromatic and heterocyclic structures,carboxyl groups, nitrogen, fragments of DNA and RNA—and inorganiccomponents—such as minerals. Humates may possess active hydrogen bondingsites, making the humate chemically reactive. The varied humatecompositions are often considered to be composed of three fractions,commonly termed humic acid, fulvic acid, and humin. Humates are oftentermed humic substances.

The varied chemical compositions of humates make it possible for them tohave varied chemical activities and allow them to achieve variousfunctionalities. Humates, when used as a soil amendment or conditioner,have been shown to produce various localized benefits to soil—includingincreased soil aeration, decreased soil density, increased soilmoisture, and overall promotion of soil health—and to plants—includingincreased root density, increased root depth, and increased nutrientuptake. Overall, the use of this naturally occurring substance inagricultural production can reduce the need for nitrogenfertilizers—thereby reducing the N.sub.2O emissions and CO.sub.2emissions associated with the production and application of suchmaterials—and the same amounts of water needed by crops grown on soilson which humates have not been applied. Humates may also be used inefforts to remove toxins from soils and make the solid suitable forother uses. This global benefit of decreasing carbon emission by usinghumate during agriculture production demonstrates the localized benefitthat is derived from crops grown with more natural-occurring levels ofhumate.

Carbon credits and carbon markets are components of national andinternational programs to reduce the growth in concentrations ofgreenhouse gases. One carbon credit is equal to one ton of carbondioxide, or in some markets, gases that are equivalent to carbondioxide. By capping greenhouse gas emissions, markets are established bywhich emissions can be financially transferred. Those who seek to emitmore GHGs than they are permitted must purchase credits from those whohave carbon credits, for example, by reducing their own carbonemissions.

Because GHG mitigation projects can generate credits, and therefore havefinancial value, an individual or company may be able to quantify thetrue cost of a carbon reduction strategy and obtain the financialbacking to undertake it. For example, a famer seeking to apply a humicsubstance may find that the cost of the humic substance is higher thanthe cost of a synthetic fertilizer. However, the farmer also maydetermine that, by applying a humic substance instead of the syntheticfertilizer, the GHG emissions from the farming operation will decreasein the short run and in the long run. In the short run, the nitrousoxide emissions from the use of synthetic fertilizers will beeliminated. In the longer run, given that humic substances can improvethe water retention capacity of soils, the need for irrigation may belessened, thereby reducing carbon dioxide emissions. A farmer that cancertify the application of such a substance and therefore the reductionin GHG emissions can use the reduction to generate a credit that can besold. The financial return can aid the farmer to reduce the cost of thetaking on the strategy.

A demand therefore exists for a system and methods to certify, quantify,verify, register, track and monetize the use and benefits derived from anaturally-occurring substance. Additionally a demand exists for systemand methods through the use of which the benefits produced onagricultural land may be organized, quantified, compared, and managed.The present invention satisfies these demands.

Further, fraud in the greenhouse gas/water quality trading offsetmarkets is pervasive, such that it is desirable now to track andvalidate such sort of processes, particularly if GHG credits are to besold or exchanged with 3^(rd) parties who were not part of creating thecredits. Additionally, the cost of creating offsets is often higher thanthe value of current market prices such that more practical cost benefitefforts must be enabled by way of tracking GHG reduction efforts with agreater granularity.

To date, efforts to identify offset potential has mostly focused onfossil fuel CO2 sequestration projects which are in many cases overbudget and behind schedule. However, nitrous oxide (N2O), a greenhousegas (GHG) with approximately 300 times more global warming potentialthan CO2, accounts for 6% of the GHG emissions in the United States.Seventy five percent of N2O emissions come from synthetic nitrogen (N)fertilizer usage in the agriculture sector primarily due to excessfertilization.

The “lowest hanging fruit” and the least costly carbon credits to createmay in fact result from incentivizing the use of readily available,inexpensive, alternative bio-stimulant products, in this case,humus-based substances being applied towards agricultural andreclamation purposes in lieu of currently utilized nitrogen basedcommercial fertilizers.

The applications of humic substances to soils has many direct andindirect benefits in terms of lowering a farmer's overhead costs whilemaintaining or even increasing their crop yield. Additionally, humicsubstances are naturally occurring and do not carry with them the samesoil and water table toxicity issues that commercial gradenitrogen-based fertilizers suffer from. As an added benefit, humicsubstances are typically located above coal and other mining veins andare discarded as waste product by the mining industry. As such, humateis inexpensive, accessible, and a large amount of is already mined andliterally going to waste.

Despite the benefit, farming is not unlike most ancient industries, andadaptation and overcoming engrained behaviors is a problem unto itself.Fortunately, money motivates even the most stubborn.

As such, there is a need to create a protocol that incentivizes farmersto change their behavior such that there is a reduction in greenhousegases, which addresses the much larger concern of climate change.

Traditional carbon credit systems reward participants with credits whichoperate as a commodity which carries with it ownership and contractrights and may be bought, sold, redeemed and applied towards GHG outputas an offset, speculated, and the like.

However, unlike gold, silver, pork bellies, and all the othercommodities bought and sold, carbon credits are unique in that theyrepresent a net tonnage of GHG that wasn't created. Carbon creditscannot be packaged, transported, put in a safe, or even observed liketraditional commodities, effectively carbon credits only exist on theledger of whoever issued the carbon credit.

The effect of this is several disparate protocols for issuing carboncredits across a variety of issuers, which brings with it a lack ofcertainty in the carbon credits themselves. Further, without consensusacross issuers, one issuer may have stricter standards for what meritsissuance of carbon offsets versus another issuer. One carbon offset maybe more trusted than another, whereas the commodities market requiresthat 1 oz of gold in Texas be the same volume and weight as an oz ofgold in New Mexico. As such, not all carbon credits are viewed as equal,which complicates monetization and trading.

Likewise, having several disparate protocols brings with it substantialissues as to records and verification. As currently not all carboncredits are viewed the same, so too are the records and ledgers behindthese different protocols differ. Traditional assets carry with themhistorical data, which are often as important as the asset themselves.Real property and substantial assets such as vehicles or artifactsnecessitate tracking the title of the asset; when the home was built,who built the home, the ownership history of the home, and so on. Thishistorical data brings with it assurances and peace of mind for bothbuyer and seller and creates stability within the asset class.

Current carbon credit models have yet to adequately address this need oftracking and cataloging credit creation, by who, when, how, and all ofthe various transfers of the credit that may take place long afterissuance.

Cumulatively then, it can be said that carbon credits are ethereal andexist on many different systems and ledgers, which necessarilyintroduces the potential for fraud. There is little stopping a bad actorfrom simply creating credits from nothing.

Recently blockchain architecture has come to the forefront of thecomputing industry. Blockchain, a system where a singular ledger existsin many copies across many computers proposes that as communication andCPU speeds are now sufficient, consensus across a threshold amount ofthose computers can itself propel computer processes and be resistant tothe traditional issues a localized server farm would face—downtime,fraud, data loss, and so on. In fact, many of the fledgling blockchainprojects have illustrated that with consensus, data can be accessible,public, and even manipulated by participants, and the consensus drivenprotocol will maintain order and stability, discarding and reverting“bad” data.

As such, it is now possible to create a blockchain that would ground theethereal carbon credit in reality. It is now possible, using blockchainarchitecture, to track the soil amendment the farmer would be using ontheir crops with such granularity that one could track what the specificmixture was, where it was purchased, where it was produced, whatprecursors were used to produce this particular fertilizer, and thehistory of the precursors which were mined, harvested, or otherwise.

Similarly, in the opposite direction it may be tracked when the farmerwas rewarded, what actions the farmer took to be rewarded, and thesubsequent buy, sell, and ultimately redemption and retirement historyof the carbon credit.

There is a need to create a “Life Cycle Approach” (LCA) similar to theenvironmental industry methods for tracking hazardous waste (cradle tograve) and water samples (chain-of-custody) that addresses thisparticularized need for GHG credit creation, validation, verification,and retirement based upon the use of humic based bio-stimulant products,a LCA will bring the reassurances necessary to finally codify what acarbon credit actually represents, and backing each credit with titlehistory may be the threshold catalyst which finally opens up the carboncredit market and places it on similar if not better basis thantraditional well understood commodities.

The protocol disclosed contemplates and addresses all of these issues.Further, this specification will also acknowledge and discuss some ofthe weaknesses of traditional blockchain architecture, and proffer thatmany of these weaknesses can be solved by applying a multichain ormultichain variant approach whereby, like a traditional blockchain, alldata is tracked, and accessible in whole or part.

However, where a traditional blockchain is a single chain whereby alloperations occur on that chain, the disclosed protocol contemplatesadditional embodiments that speak to these multichain or multichainvariants which would have the benefit of allowing for subprocesses tooccur on parallel sidechains or streams. When these sidechains resolve,the sidechain may be closed out and a final optimized record created,with the main blockchain then pointing to the optimized data. The effectof this is a substantial decrease in overall size of the mainchain,while maintaining the flexibility to have as much granularity as isneeded for a side/subprocess. This is particularly important when whatmay be important as between the mining and fertilizer operations is notnecessarily critical to a party downstream who is concerned with chainof title or if the credit is redeemed and retired.

To put it another way, multichain architecture operates similar to aMicrosoft Excel Spreadsheet file; within that file may be severaldifferent pages, each with its own data tracked and formulas andmanipulation. The disclosed protocol enables a blockchain, the excelfile, to be created and then distributed, but the multichain featureswould enable different users to access what is relevant to them withoutcluttering up the pages of other interested parties who are focused ondifferent data.

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is considered the sole culprit for global warming;however, nitrous oxide (N2O), a GHG with approximately 300 times moreglobal warming potential than CO2, accounts for 6% of the GHG emissionsin the United States. While most people associate CO2 and GHG emissionswith passenger vehicles, this is far from the truth. In fact,transportation as a whole accounts for only 13% of GHG emissions bysource. See FIG. 10 .

Agriculture activity actually by itself accounts for just slightly moreGHG emissions than transportation activity. That said, the public andpoliticians continue to focus on vehicles as one of the primarysolutions to the looming climate change crisis.

When agriculture activity is considered, it is even more surprising tofind that roughly seventy five percent of all N2O emissions stem fromsynthetic nitrogen (N) fertilizer usage in the agriculture sector, andshockingly this is primarily due to excess fertilization. Numerousstudies have shown that changes in soil management practices,specifically optimizing N fertilizer use and amending soil with organicand humate materials can reverse soil damage and actually improve afarmer's or land reclamation company's balance sheet. Soil restorationis internationally recognized as one of the lowest cost GHG abatementopportunities available. Profitability improves in two ways: (1) loweroperating costs resulting from lower input costs (water and fertilizer);and (2) increased revenue by participation in emerging GHG offsetsmarkets (nitrogen and carbon), and water quality trading markets.

Nitrogen's Role as a GHG is an Increasing Concern

Since the Industrial Revolution there has been a significant atmosphericincrease in the concentration of greenhouse gases (“GHGs”) which sciencebelieves has led to an increase in the average global surfacetemperature of 0.6° C. since the late 19th century. The current warmingrate of 0.17° C./decade is greater than the critical rate of 0.1°C./decade where it is thought that ecosystems cannot adjust, and anyonefollowing news is now familiar with the mounting concerns.

While most people only associate greenhouse gases with Carbon and humanactivity, GHGs are created and reuptake occurs across what can bethought of as five principal global C pools. See Chart 2 below—PrincipleGlobal Carbon Pools The total soil Carbon/Greenhouse Gas pool is fourtimes the biotic (trees, etc.) pool and about three times theatmospheric pool. All these pools are interconnected, and elementscirculate among them, but most people have yet to consider other areasto address past carbon production, vehicle use, and energy beinggenerated from oil and coal. See FIG. 11 .

In its inert form, nitrogen is harmless and abundant, and benefits cropsbut the addition of synthetic nitrogen-based fertilizers has broughtwith it the unintended consequence of diminishing soil nutrition anddisrupts the beneficial associations between plants and the soilmicrobial communities. Cropping practices and the use of nitrogenfertilizers are estimated to cause 78% of the total soil N2O emissionsin the United States. These emissions have a greenhouse warmingpotential 310 times that of CO2. See Table 3 below—Global WarmingPotentials, Lifetimes, and Horizon by GHG. The rate of industrialnitrogen fixation now approximately equals Earth's natural rate,resulting in a two to threefold increase in the total inventory of fixedN on the surface of the Earth through agricultural fertilizerapplications.

Table 3. Global Warming Potential of Select Greenhouse Gases.

Nitrous oxide is produced in the soil predominantly by the microbialprocesses of nitrification and denitrification. Factors that controlthese two processes—available carbon, inorganic nitrogen, and oxygen asaffected by soil moisture, porosity, and aggregate structure—regulateproduction of N20.

Currently, the intensive use of N fertilizers in modern agriculture andland reclamation is rapidly increasing both C and N in the atmosphericpool and contributing to global greenhouse gas accumulation.

GWP values and lifetimes from 2013 IPCC AR5 p.714 Lifetime GWP timehorizon (with climate-carbon feedbacks) (years) 20 years 100 yearsCarbon Dioxide (CO₂) 50-200 1 Methane (CH₄) 12.4 86 34 HFC-134a(hydrofluorocarbon) 13.4 3790 1550 CFC-11 (chlorofluorocarbon) 45.0 70205350 Nitrous Oxide (N₂O) 121.0 268 293 Carbon tetrafluoride (CF₄) 50.0004950 7350

In 2012, N2O emissions from cropland soils in the United States wereapproximately 195 million metric tons of CO2-equivalent (CO2e) accordingto the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's 2014 National GreenhouseGas Inventory. This is equivalent to 41 million passenger vehiclesannually. As crisis looms, it is wholly unreasonable for only certaincontributing activities to be targeted. Further, some human activitiessuch as transportation methods or fuels require substantialtechnological advances and investment, and while it is commendable tocreate cleaner energy, there are clearly atmospheric pools that areneglected, and inexpensive, readily available greenhouse gas gainsstemming from other sources can no longer be dismissed.

Recently, using a new method for estimating greenhouse gases thatcombines atmospheric measurements with model predictions, LawrenceBerkeley Laboratory researchers found that the level of nitrous oxide inCalifornia alone may be 2.5 to 3 times greater than the currentinventory estimates. “If our results are accurate, then it suggests thatN2O makes up not 3 percent of California's total effective greenhousegases but closer to 10 percent.” Most of California's N2O emissions arebelieved to come primarily from nitrogen fertilizers used inagricultural production.

Breaking the Nitrogen Cycle with Humate

By closely tracking N2O emissions, crop yields and other ecosystemresponses to fertilizers, it has been shown that N2O emissions increaseexponentially with increasing nitrogen fertilizer use. Researchers havealso successfully demonstrated that N2O emissions in row-crop productioncan be substantially reduced by using less nitrogen fertilizer with norelated reduction in crop yield.

In other words, adding a small amount of fertilizer above the amountneeded for optimal crop growth creates much more N2O than otherwisewould have been produced with negligible benefits. The more excessnitrogen there is available, the greater the additional rate of N2Oproduction.

Further, despite a strong inter-dependence between climate and soilquality, the role of soil organic carbon (SOC) dynamics on historicincrease in atmospheric CO2, and its strategic importance in decreasingthe future rate of increase of atmospheric CO2 have only recently beenrecognized. Whereas the exact magnitude of the historic loss of SOC maybe debatable, it is important to realize that the process of SOCdepletion can be reversed. Further, improvements in quality and quantityof the SOC pool can increase biomass/agronomic production, enhance waterquality, reduce sedimentation of reservoirs and waterways, and in and ofitself helps mitigate some of the risks associated with global warming.

Thus, a transition to an optimal application of N fertilizer andattention and improvements targeting soil health provide a clear path tooverall GHG reductions. One way to dramatically increase a soil'soverall heath is by amending the soil with humic substances.

Soil Generally

Organic matter is defined as a grouping of carbon containing compoundswhich have originated from living beings and deposited on or within theearth's structural components. Soil organic matter includes the remainsof all plant and animal bodies which have fallen on the earth's surfaceor purposely applied by man in the form of organically synthesizedpesticides. A fertile soil should contain from 2 to 8 percent organicmatter. Most soils in fact contain less than 2% organic matter. Inacidic, nutrient leached sandy soils substantial portions of the organicmatter is in the form of plant debris and fulvic acids (FAs). In neutraland alkaline soils, a large percentage of the organic matter is presentin the form of humic acids (HAs) and humin.

Humic and Fulvic Substances Defined and Explained

The nomenclature and classification of humus is truly complex andconfusing to the layman and professional alike. Consensus amonggeologists, engineers, biologists, chemists, agronomists, andregulators, is difficult, primarily owing to a lack of uniformdefinitions of commonly used terms across professions.

Humus is most often referred to as a mineral or as an industrialmineral. Before a substance can be defined as a mineral, a substancemust satisfy the following well-established long-standing, scientificcriteria accepted by the international minerals community: a) thesubstance must be naturally occurring; b) the substance must beinorganic; c) the substance must have a definite chemical composition;d) the substance must have a highly ordered atomic (crystalline)structure; and e) the substance must have specific physical properties.Humate satisfies only (a), therefore, humate cannot be defined as amineral and as such humate cannot be considered either an industrial ornon-metallic mineral.

Humus is actually a naturally occurring, organic compound, composed of avariety of highly weathered organic compounds, and is commonlyassociated with coal, lignite, shale, claystone, and mudstones. Theformation of humic substances is not completely understood but what isknown is that humic substances arise during the decay of organicmaterials. As such, humic substances are often associated with coal,lignite, and mudstones because humic substances are most commonly foundduring mining operations and appear in a distinct layer above coalveins. Currently, humus is considered a waste product by the miningindustry and is discarded with topsoils and mine leavings and theirbenefits largely ignored or underutilized.

Humus is defined as a brown to black complex variable of carboncontaining compounds not recognized under a light microscope aspossessing cellular organization in the form of plant and animal bodies.Humus is separated from the non humic substances such as carbohydrates(a major fraction of soil carbon), fats, waxes, alkanes, peptides, aminoacids, proteins, lipids and organic acids by the fact that distinctchemical formulae can be written for these non humic substances. Mostsmall molecules of non humic substances are rapidly degraded bymicroorganisms within the soil. In contrast soil humus is slow todecompose (degrade) under natural soil conditions. When in combinationwith soil minerals soil humus can persist in the soil for severalhundred years. Humus is the major soil organic matter component, makingup 65% to 75% of the total. Humus assumes an important role as afertility component of all soils, far in excess of the percentagecontribution it makes to the total soil mass.

Humic substances are the collectively the subcomponents of humus and assuch are high molecular weight compounds that together form the brown toblack hydrophilic, molecularly flexible, polyelectrolytes called humus.Many of the components of humus are heterogenous, relatively largestable organic complexes. They function to give the soil structure,porosity, water holding capacity, cation and anion exchange, and areinvolved in the chelation of mineral elements. The elemental analysis ofhumic substances reveals that they are primarily composed of carbon,oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen, and sulfur in complex carbon chains(aliphatic components that make up approximately 40% 50% of the total) CC C C and 4, 5, and 6 member carbon rings (aromatic components that makeup 35 60% of the total) with C C, C N and C═O groupings.

Humic substances have been shown to contain a wide variety of molecularcomponents. Some typical components are polysaccharides; fatty acids;polypeptides; lignins; esters; phenols; ethers; carbonyls; quinones;lipids: peroxides; various combination of benzene, acetal, ketal, andlactol, and furan ringed compounds; and aliphatic (carbon chains)compounds. The oxidative degradation of some humic substances producesaliphatic, phenolic, and benzenecarboxylic acids in addition to nalkanes and n fatty acids. The major phenolic acids released containapproximately 3 hydroxyl (OH) groups and between 1 and 5 carboxyl (COOH)groups.

Humic substances can be subdivided into four major subcategories: (1)HUMIN, (2) HUMIC ACIDS (HAs), (3) FULVIC ACIDS (FAs), and (4) HUMATES.These subdivisions are arbitrarily based on the solubility of eachfraction in water adjusted to different acid alkaline (pH levels)conditions.

1) Humins

Humins are that fraction of humic substances which are not soluble inalkali (high pH) and are not soluble in acid (low pH). Humins are notsoluble in water at any pH. Humin complexes are considered macro organic(very large) substances because their molecular weights (MW) range fromapproximately 100,000 to 10,000,000. In comparison the molecular weightsof carbohydrates (complex sugars) range from approximately 500 to100,000. The chemical and physical properties of humins are onlypartially understood. Any humins present within the soil are the mostresistant to decomposition (slow to breakdown) of all the humicsubstances.

Some of the observed benefits of maintaining a threshold concentrationof humins within soil are: humins have been demonstrated to improve thesoil's overall water holding capacity, an improvement in soil structure,improvements in soil stability, and humins themselves function as acation exchange system, all of which markedly improve soil fertility andcan even rehabilitate soil that either lacks adequate nutrition or soilthat has become unbalanced and toxic. Because of these importantfunctions, humin is a desirable and should be a key component of fertilesoil composition, particularly when agriculture depletion or erosion areconcerned.

2) Humic Acid

Humic acids (HAs) are thought to comprise a mixture of weak aliphaticand aromatic organic acids which are not soluble in water under acidicconditions but are soluble in water under alkaline conditions. Humicacids consist of that fraction of humic substances that are precipitatedfrom aqueous solution when the pH is decreased below 2.

Humic acids (HAs) are termed polydisperse because of their variablechemical features. From a three-dimensional aspect these complex carboncontaining compounds are considered to be flexible linear polymers thatexist as random coils with cross linked bonds. On average 35% of thehumic acid (HA) molecules are aromatic (carbon rings), while theremaining components are in the form of weak aliphatic (carbon chains)molecules. The molecular weight of humic acids (HAs) range fromapproximately 10,000 to 100,000. Humic acid (HA) polymers readily bindclay minerals to form stable organic clay complexes. Peripheral pores inthe polymer are capable of accommodating (binding) natural and syntheticorganic chemicals in a lattice (clathrate) type arrangement.

Humic acids (HAs) readily form salts with inorganic trace mineralelements. An analysis of extracts of naturally occurring humic acids(HAs) will reveal the presence of over 60 different mineral elementspresent. These trace elements are bound to humic acid molecules in aform that can be readily utilized by various living organisms.

As a result, humic acids (HAs) function as an important ion exchange andmetal complexing (chelating) system which enhances the overall health ofsoil and improved interaction between the soil itself and plant rootsystems.

3) Fulvic Acid

Fulvic acids (FAs) are a mixture of weak aliphatic and aromatic organicacids which are soluble in water at all pH conditions (acidic, neutraland alkaline). Their composition and shape can be quite variable. Thesize of fulvic acids (HFs) are smaller than humic ads (HAs), withmolecular weights which range from approximately 1,000 to 10,000. Fulvicacids (FAs) have an oxygen content twice that of humic acids (HAs). Theyhave many carboxyl (COOH) and hydroxyl (COH) groups, thus fulvic acids(FAs) are much more chemically reactive. The exchange capacity of fulvicacids (FAs) is more than double that of humic acids (HAs). This highexchange capacity is due to the total number of carboxyl (COOH) groupspresent. The number of carboxyl groups present in fulvic acids (FAs)ranges from 520 to 1120 cmol (H+)/kg. Fulvic acids collected from manydifferent sources and analyzed, show no evidence of methoxy groups (CH3)groups, they are low in phenols, and are less aromatic compared to humicacids from the same sources.

Because of the relatively small size of fulvic acid (FA) molecules theycan readily enter plant roots, stems, and leaves. As they enter theseplant parts, they carry trace minerals with them from plant surfacesinto plant tissues themselves. Fulvic acids (FAs) are already consideredto be a key ingredient of high-quality foliar fertilizers. Foliar sprayapplications containing fulvic acid (FA) mineral chelates, at specificplant growth stages, can be used as a primary production technique formaximizing the plants productive capacity. Once applied to plant foliagefulvic acids (FAs) transport trace minerals directly to metabolic sitesin plant cells effectively enhancing and speeding up a plant's nutritionlevels. Fulvic acids (FAs) are the most effective carbon containingchelating compounds known and nontoxic when applied at relatively lowconcentrations.

4) Humates

Humates are the metal (mineral) salts of humic (HAs) or fulvic acids(FAs). Within any humic substance there are a large number of complexhumate molecules. The formation of a humate is based on the ability ofthe carboxyl (COOH) and hydroxyl (OH) groups (on the outside of thepolymers) to dissociate (expel) the hydrogen ion. Once the hydrogen ionsare dissociated a negatively charged anion (COO— or —CO—) results. Twoof these anions can bind to positive metal cations, such as Iron (Fe++),copper (Cu++), zinc (Zn++), calcium (Ca++), manganese (Mg++), andmagnesium (Mg++). The simplified reaction (COO—+Fe++>>COOFe++H) proceedsto bind two anions, frequently a COOH and a COH group.

Ultimately, the humate composition of any one humic substance isspecific for that substance and humus can be thought of as anoverarching genus with several subspecies of naturally occurringcompounds, and there exists a large variability in the molecularcomposition of different humic substances. Humates from differentmineral deposits would be expected to have their own unique features,something that the disclosed protocol intends to account for, sample,measure, and catalogue as what may be a valuable soil additive sourcedfrom a particular location may not necessarily make the most optimalsoil additive for another particular location.

Humic Substances and their Indirect Benefits to Soil Health

Humic substances are an important source of nutrients and energy forbeneficial soil organisms as well, which in and of themselves are animportant component of overall soil health. Humic substances and nonhumic (organic) compounds provide the energy and many of the mineralrequirements for soil microorganisms and soil animals. Beneficial soilorganisms lack the photosynthetic apparatuses to capture energy directlyfrom the sun and thus must survive on residual carbon substances in thesoil. Energy stored within the carbon bonds functions to provide energyfor various metabolic reactions within these organisms. Beneficial soilorganisms (algae, yeasts, bacteria, fungi, nematodes, mycorrhizae, andsmall animals) perform many beneficial functions which influence soilfertility and plant health. For example, the bacteria release organicacids which aid in the solubilization of mineral elements bound in soil.Bacteria also release complex polysaccharides (sugar-based compounds)that help create soil crumbs (aggregates). Soil crumbs give soil adesirable structure. Other beneficial soil microorganisms such as theActinomyces release antibiotics into the soil. These antibiotics aretaken up by the plant to protect it against pests. Antibiotics alsofunction to create desirable ecological balances of soil organisms onthe root surface (rhizoplane) and in soil near the roots (rhizosphere).Fungi also perform many beneficial functions in soils. For example,mycorrhizae aid plant roots in the uptake of water and trace elements.Other fungi decompose crop residues and vegetative matter releasingbound nutrients for other organisms. Many of the organic compoundsreleased by fungi aid in forming humus and soil crumbs. Beneficial soilanimals create tunnel like channels in the soil. These channels allowthe soil to breath, and exchange gases with the atmosphere. Soil animalsalso aid in the formation of humus and help balance the concentration ofsoil microorganisms. A healthy fertile soil must contain sufficientcarbon containing compounds to sustain the billions of microscopic lifeforms required for a fertile soil and a healthy plant. A living soil isa fertile healthy soil.

Available water is without doubt the most important component of afertile soil. The most important function of humic substances within thesoil is their ability to hold water. Humus functions to improve thesoil's water holding capacity.

From a quantitative standpoint water is the most important substancederived by plants from the soil. Humic substances help create adesirable soil structure that facilitates water infiltration and helpshold water within the root zone. Because of the large surface area andinternal electrical charges, humic substances function as water sponges.These sponge-like substances have the ability to hold seven times theirvolume in water, a greater water holding capacity than sod clays. Waterstored within the topsoil when needed, provides a carrier medium fornutrients required by soil organisms and plant roots.

Soils which contain high concentrations of humic substances can retainand hold water for crop use during periods of drought. This is whygrowers who apply humate based fertilizers and integrate productionpractices which preserve humic substances can frequently harvest a cropduring periods of dry weather and reap the benefits of reduced waterapplications during their rain seasons.

Humic substances are key components of a friable (loose) soil structureand help curb loss of topsoil to erosion. Various carbon containinghumic substances are key components of soil crumbs (aggregates). Complexcarbohydrates synthesized by bacteria and humic substances functiontogether with clay and silt to form soil aggregates. As the humicsubstances become intimately associated with the mineral fraction of thesoil, colloidal complexes of humus-clay and humus silt aggregates areformed. These aggregates are formed by electrical processes whichincrease the cohesive forces that cause very fine soil particles andclay components to attract each other. Once formed these aggregates helpcreate a desirable crumb structure in the top soil, making it morefriable. Soils with good crumb structure have improved tilth, and moreporous openings (open spaces). These pores allow for gaseous interchangewith the atmosphere, and for greater water infiltration.

Humic substances also have rehabilitative qualities. Degradation orinactivation of toxic substances is mediated by application of humicsubstances. Soil humic substances function to either stabilize or assistin the degradation of toxic substances such as: nicotine, aflatoxins,antibiotics, shallots, and most organic pesticides. In the microbialdegradation process not all of the carbon contained within these toxinsis released as CO2. A portion of these toxic molecules, primarily thearomatic ring compounds are stabilized and integrated within the complexpolymers of humic substances. Humic substances have electrically chargedsites on their surfaces which function to attract and inactivatepesticides and other toxic substances. For this reason, theEnvironmental Protection Agency recommends the use of humates forcleanup of toxic waste sites. Many bioremediation companies apply humatebased compounds to toxic waste sites as a part of their cleanup program.Growers interested in cleaning up their soils (destroying various toxicpesticides) can accelerate the degradation of poisons (toxins) byapplying humic substances. Growers who farm soils low in humus need toinclude the purchase of humic substances in their fertilizer budget. Thecost of humic substances can be more than offset by reduced costs ofother fertilizer ingredients and generation of resulting carbon offsets.

Humic substances also help to stabilize and buffer (neutralize) the soilpH and liberate carbon dioxide. Humic substances function to buffer thehydrogen ion (pH) concentration of the soil. Repeated field studies haveprovided experimental evidence that the addition of humic substances tosoils helps to neutralize the pH of those soils. Both acidic andalkaline soils are neutralized. Once the soil is neutralized, then manytrace elements formerly bound in the soil and unavailable to plantroots, because of alkaline or acidic conditions, become available to theplant roots. Humic substances also liberate carbon dioxide (CO2) fromcalcium carbonates present within the soil. The released CO2 may betaken up by the plant or it may form carbonic acids. The carbonic acidsact on soil minerals to release plant nutrients.

Soil enzymes themselves are stabilized and inactivated by humicsubstances. Soil enzymes (complex proteins) are stabilized by humicsubstances within the soil by covalent bonding. Stabilization rendersthese enzymes less subject to microbial degradation. Once stabilized andbound to the humic substances enzyme activity is greatly reduced orceases to function. However, many of these bonds are relatively weakduring periods of pH change within the soil, these enzymes can bereleased. When some components of humic substance react with soilenzymes they are more tightly bound. For example, phenolic enzymecomplexes are frequently attached to clays, further stabilizing theenzymes. These enzyme stabilization processes help to restrict theactivity of potential plant pathogens. As the potential plant pathogenreleases enzymes designed to break down the plant's defenses, thepathogen's enzymes become bound to humic substances. As a result, thepathogens are unable to invade potential host plants.

Soil temperature and water evaporation rate and thus retention isadditionally stabilized by humic substances. Humic substances functionto help stabilize soil temperatures and slow the rate of waterevaporation. The insulating properties of humic substances help maintaina more uniform soil temperature, especially during periods of rapidclimatic changes, such as cold spells or heat waves. Because water isbound within the humic substances and humic substances reducetemperature fluctuations, soil moisture is less likely to be releasedinto the atmosphere.

The electrical features of humic substances influence known chemicalreactions. Both groups of complex organic acids, humic acids (HAs) andfulvic acids (FAs) have been proven to be involved in three specificchemical reactions. These reactions are commonly termed: (1)electrostatic (columbic) attraction (2) complex formation or chelation,and (3) water bridging.

Electrostatic attraction of trace minerals reduces leaching intosubsoil. Electrostatic attraction of metal cations to anionic sites onthe humic substance keeps these ions from leaching into the subsoil. Themetal cation is loosely attached, thus can be released when attracted toanother stronger electrical charge. The cation is readily available inthe soil environment for transport into the plant roots or exchanged foranother metal cation.

Electrically charged sites on humic substances function to dissolve andbind trace minerals. When a complex reaction with metal cations occurson the humic substance surface it is termed chelation. Two negativelycharged sites on the humic substance attract metal cations with twonegative charges. As a result, the cation binds itself to more than onecharged anionic site. By forming organic metal claws these organic acidsbring about the dissolution of primary and secondary minerals within thesoil. These minerals then become available for uptake by plant roots.The greater the affinity of the metal cation for humic acid (HA) orfulvic acid (FA), the easier the dissolution of the cation from variousmineral surfaces. Both the acidic effect and the chelation effectsappear to be involved in dissolution of minerals and binding processes.Evidence for the dissolution of minerals can be supported by x raydiffraction and infrared analysis. Chelation of plant nutrients such asiron (Fe), copper (Cu), zinc (Zn), magnesium (Mg), manganese (Mn), andcalcium (Ca) reduces their toxicity as cations, prevents their leaching,and increases their uptake rate by plant roots.

The chelation exchange reaction involves a transition element. Therelease of these trace minerals into the plant is quite different fromthe classical cation exchange system. The cations with a plus twocharge, present in the chelate, cannot be replaced by a singly chargedcation such as H+, K+ or Na+. Cations with one positive charge areunable to replace a metal ion, such as Cu++ with two positive charges.The elated metal ion can be exchanged by another transitional metal ionthat has two positive changes. The chelates provide the carriermechanism by which depleted nutrient elements are replenished at theroot surface. The chelation process also increases the mass flow ofmicronutrient mineral elements to the roots. The chelation of heavytoxic metallic elements present within the soil is also influenced byhumic substances present. When toxic heavy metals such as mercury (Hg),lead (Pb), and cadmium (Cd) are chelated these organic metal complexesbecome less available for plant uptake. Detailed studies of chelation,of heavy metals in industrial sludge has illustrated the value of humicsubstances in preventing uptake of these toxic metals. Keep in mind thatfree metal cations such as Fe+2, Cu+2, and Zn+2 are incompatible withplant cells. Direct applications of metallic salts, such as ironsulfate, copper sulfate, and zinc sulfate, to correct trace elementdeficiencies, can cause serious problems when the soils lack sufficienthumic substances for buffering. Trace minerals should be applied in anorganic chelate, preferably by humic acids (HAs) and fulvic acids (FAs).Many scientific studies have shown that humic substances [humic acids(HAs) and fulvic acids (FAs)] present in the root zone reduce thetoxicity of metal cations.

Water bridging is an important function of humic and fulvic acids. Waterbridging by humic substances involves the attraction of a water moleculefollowed by the attraction of a mineral element cation (simplyillustrated by (COO—H₂O—Fe+) at an anionic site on the humic (HA) orfulvic acid (FA) polymers. The water holding capacity of humicsubstances and their ability to bind trace mineral elements functiontogether in water bridging. Water bridging is believed to improve themobility of nutrient ions through the soil solution to the root. Thesemechanisms also help reduce leaching of plant nutrients into thesubsoil. Recent experiments indicate that water bridging may be morecommon in humic substances than originally believed.

Humic substances aid in the position of soil minerals by forming metalorganic clay complexes, a process termed soil genesis. Soil formation(soil genesis) involves a complexing of transition mineral elements,such as copper (Cu), zinc (Zn), iron (Fe), and manganese (Mn) from soilminerals with humic acids (HAs), fulvic acids (FAs) and days. Thiscomplexing process inhibits crystallization of these mineral elements.The complexing process is in part controlled by the acidity of theseweak acids and the chelating ability of humic substances. In the absenceof humic substances trace minerals elements are converted to insolubleprecipitates such as metal carbonates, oxides, sulfides and hydroxides.Thus, the presence of humic acids (HAs) and fulvic acids (FAs) withinsoils inhibit the development of new soil minerals. For example,crystallization of iron to form iron oxides is inhibited by the presenceof humic acids (HAs) and fulvic acids (FAs). Soils deficient in humicsubstances may contain adequate iron, however the iron present isfrequently bound in forms which render it unavailable to plant roots. Asthe concentration of fulvic acids (FAs) increases within a soil,transition metal crystallization is first delayed and then inhibited athigh fulvic acid (FA) concentrations. Cations of these transition metals(e.g. Cu++, Zn++ and Fe++) are held in large humic polymers, bychelation, for future release to sod organisms or plant roots. Thesephysical and chemical processes prevent leaching of plant nutrients intothe subsoil.

Stored energy and trace mineral content of humic substances helpssustain sod organisms involved in transmutation. The presence of humicsubstances within saline soils (those soils which contain high saltconcentrations, e.g. sodium chloride) aid in the transmutation of thesodium ions. The transmutation reactions, a biological process thatoccurs within living organisms, result in the combining of sodium with asecond element, such as oxygen, to form a new element. Although thetheory of transmutation has met considerable opposition by sometraditional physicists and chemists, biologist have recorded convincingdata to prove that transmutation occurs in living organisms. Applicationof humins, humic acids, and fulvic acids to saline soils, in combinationwith specific soil organisms, results in a reduction in theconcentration of sodium salts (e.g. NaCl). The reduction is notcorrelated with a leaching of the salt, rather with an increase in theconcentration of other elements. The addition of humic substances tosoils containing excessive salts can help reduce the concentration ofthose salts. By reducing the salt content of a soil its fertility andhealth can be “brought back” to provide a more desirable environment forplant root growth.

Humic Substances and their Direct Benefits to Plant Life and Crops

Plant growth itself is influenced both indirectly and directly by humicsubstances. Positive correlations between the humus content of the soil,plant yields and product quality have been published in many differentscientific journals. Indirect effects, previously discussed, are thosefactors which provide energy for the beneficial organisms within thesoil, influence the soil's water holding capacity, influence the soil'sstructure, release of plant nutrients from soft minerals, increasedavailability of trace minerals, and in general improved soil fertility.Direct effects include those changes in plant metabolism that occurfollowing the uptake of organic macromolecules, such as humic acids,fulvic acids. Once these compounds enter plant cells several biochemicalchanges occur in membranes and various cytoplasmic components of plantcells. Some of the biochemical improvements in plant metabolism asinfluenced by humic substances, are summarized in the flowchartillustrated in FIG. 12 .

The absorption of humic substances into seeds has a positive influenceon seed germination and seedling development. The application of humic(HA) or fulvic acids (FA) to seeds will increase the seed germination;resulting in higher seed germination rates. Application rates of humicacids (HAs) or fulvic acids (FAs), required for improved seedgermination, range from 20 to 100 mg/liter of seed. In order forimproved germination to occur the humic substances must be presentwithin the cells of seeds. As the humic substance enters the seed cells,respiration rate increases, and cell division processes are accelerated.These same respiratory processes enhance root meristem development andactivate other growing points within the seedlings. Humic substanceshave been demonstrated to enhance mitotic activity during cell divisionunder carefully controlled experiments. Placement of these humicsubstances on seeds (seed treatment) or within the seed furrow willsignificantly improve seed germination and seedling development.Excessive concentrations of humic acids (HAs) and/or fulvic acids (FAs)can inhibit seed germination and at high concentrations can kill youngseedlings. Therefore, follow recommended rates when applying humicsubstances.

Humic substances have a very pronounced influence on specifically thegrowth of plant roots. When humic acids (HAs) and/or fulvic acids (FAs)are applied to soil enhancement of root initiation and increased rootgrowth are observed. Thus, the common observation that humic acids (HAs)and fulvic acids (FAs) are root simulators. In most experimental studiesplant root growth is stimulated to a greater extent compared tostimulation of above-ground plant parts. Carefully designed experimentshave been conducted under controlled conditions to measure plantresponse. For example, replicate treatments of plants grown within thegreenhouse, with and without humic acid and fulvic acids has illustratedhow humic substances influence root growth. In repeated experiments thetreated root weights averaged from 20 to 50% heavier compared to theweights of non-treated roots. The type of humic substance applied had asignificant influence on the percent of increase. Not all humicsubstances contain a desirable molecular mixture of humins, humic acids(HAs) and fulvic acids (FAs) capable of rapidly stimulating root growth.Some humic substances, because of their large molecular sizes, failed tostimulate plant root development. Root stimulation occurs when thesmaller molecular components within fulvic acid (FA) occur at aconcentration which ranges from 10 to 100 mg/liter of solution. Growthis further stimulated when fulvic acids (FAs) are used in combinationwith humic acids (HAs) and other required plant nutrients. Humicsubstances improve plant nutrition, however they are not completenutrients by themselves. Excessively high concentrations of humicsubstances can result in a reduction in root weight. For optimum plantgrowth humic acids (HAs) and fulvic acids (FAs) should be applied atrelatively low concentrations. Applications of humic substances within afairly wide range of concentrations are highly beneficial to plant rootdevelopment.

Humic acids (HA)s and fulvic acids (FAs) have direct effects on plantcell membranes. Humic acids (HAs) increase the permeability, ease bywhich mineral elements move back and forth through the cell membranes,resulting in an increased transport of various mineral nutrients tosites of metabolic need. Humic substances influence both hydrophilic(having water affinity) and hydrophobic (lacking water affinity) siteson the membrane's surfaces. In addition, many scientists believe thatthe phospholipid components of the membranes are electrically altered byhumic substances. As a result of these electrical changes, the membranesurface becomes more active in the transport of trace minerals fromoutside the plant cell into the cell cytoplasm. Energy metabolism isaccelerated, and the chlorophyll content of plant leaves is enhanced bythe presence of humic substances. When humic acids (HAs) and fulvicacids (FAs) are applied to plant leaves the chlorophyll content of thoseleaves increases. As the chlorophyll concentration increases there is acorrelated increase in the uptake of oxygen. Chlorophyll developmentwithin plant leaves is more pronounced when fulvic acids (FAs) arepresent in the foliar fertilizer. Organic acids [humic acids (HAs) andfulvic acids (FAs)] also increase the concentration of messengerribonucleic acids (m RNA) in plant cells. Messenger RNA is essential formany biochemical processes within cells. Activation of severalbiochemical processes results in an increase in enzyme synthesis and anincrease in the protein contents of the leaves. During these metabolicchanges an increase in the concentration of several important enzymes isdetected. Some of the enzymes which are reported to increase arecatalase, peroxidases, diphenoloxidase, polyphenoloxidases, andinvertase. These enzymes activate the formation of both carrier andstructural proteins.

Humic acids (HAs) and fulvic acids (FAs) are excellent foliar fertilizercarriers and activators. Application of humic acids (HAs) or fulvicacids (FAs) in combination with trace elements and other plantnutrients, as foliar sprays, can improve the growth of plant foliage,roots, and fruits. By increasing plant growth processes within theleaves an increase in carbohydrates content of the leaves and stemsoccurs. These carbohydrates are then transported down the stems into theroots where they are in part released from the root to provide nutrientsfor various soil microorganisms on the rhizoplane and in therhizosphere. The microorganisms then release acids and other organiccompounds which increase the availability of plant nutrients. Othermicroorganisms release “hormone like” compounds which are taken up byplant roots. The required concentration of humic acids (HAs) and/orfulvic acids (FAs) within the foliar spray should be relatively low,generally less than 50 mg of concentrated dry humic substance per literof water. Foliar fertilizers containing humic acids (HAs) and fulvicacids (FAs) in combination with nitrogen, potassium, phosphorus andvarious trace minerals have been demonstrated to be from 100 to 500%more efficient compared to applications of similar fertilizers to thesoil. Foliar fertilizers are also more economical because smallerquantities of fertilizer are required to obtain significant plantresponse. Plant nutrients within foliar fertilizers are rapidly absorbedby the plant leaves. Within 8 hours after humic substances are appliedchanges in many different metabolic processes are detected. Enhancedcarbohydrate production can be detected within 24 to 48 hours afterfoliar feeding by use of a refractometer. Enhanced carbohydrateproduction can either result in improved product quality or increasedyields.

Some molecular components of humic substances act to regulate plantgrowth hormones. Both humic acids (HAs) and fulvic acids (FAs) inhibitthe enzyme, indole acetic acid oxidase (IAA oxidase) thereby hinderingIAA destruction. The plant growth regulator, indole acetic acid (IAA)performs many important functions within growing plant parts. When IAAis protected from IAA degrading enzymes the IAA continues to stimulategrowth processes. Unfractionated humic acids (HAs) are the mosteffective in regulating plant growth hormones. Humic substances alsoinfluence other enzymes involved in growth regulation. When the activityof growth regulators is maintained within plant tissues, plantmetabolism remains functional and normal growth processes continue tooccur.

Humic substances increase production of high energy adenosinetriphosphate (ATP) within plant cells. As various metabolic systems areactivated by humic substances an increase in the production of highenergy phosphate bonds (ATP) occurs. The high energy phosphate bonds ofATP function as a major driving energy for many different metabolicreactions.

Humic substances provide free radicals to plant cells. Free radicals are“active sites” on the polymers which function as electron donors. Freeradicals assist in exerting positive effects on seed germination, rootinitiation and plant growth in general. Free radicals contain one ormore unpaired electrons, are highly reactive, short lived, and capableof participating in many different reactions. Humic acids (HAs) containtwo types of free radicals. The free radical content of humic substancesis related to the humification state of the humic substance. The greaterthe humification (low H:C ratios) the darker the color of the humus.Thus, humic acids (HAs) contain a higher free radical content comparedto fulvic acids (FAs), which have a high H:C ratio. The relatively lowfree radical content of fulvic acids (FAs), associated with high H:Cratios, is indicative of a low degree of chemical condensation for thesesubstances. The first class of commonly found free radical within humuspermanent, stable type which persists for longer periods. The secondclass is a transitional paramagnetic type which is transitory. Each freeradical type has a specific function (e.g. catalysts, photosensitizer,and activators) in various metabolic processes within living cells andboth are desirable to find within a particular soil sample.

The mean residence times of these organic mineral complex aggregatesvaries with different humic substances. The mean residence time of humicsubstances within these aggregates, based on radiocarbon dating, usingextracts from non-disturbed soils, is as follows: humin, 1140 years;humic acid, 1235 years; and fulvic acid, 870 years.

Synthetic N P K Fertilizers and the Problems they Cause; why Humate isPreferable

While the benefits of humate and humic substances are becoming betterunderstood, their necessity as a soil additive still lacksacknowledgement by the commercial farming industry, owing to adherenceto traditional farming practices, the cheapness of synthetic NPKfertilizers, and a lack of understanding given the complexity of soilcomposition and the numerous components and beneficial additives thatcontinue to emerge. See FIG. 13 .

Properly managed fertilizers support cropping systems that provideeconomic, social and environmental benefits. On the other hand, poorlymanaged nutrient applications can decrease profitability and increasenutrient losses, potentially degrading water and air. As can beexpected, with such a vast amount of soil additives as potentialcandidates, it is relatively easy for one lacking proper information orguidance to bring about potentially long lasting negative consequencesin their soil conditions.

The general 4R Nutrient Stewardship principles as purposed by theFertilizer Institute, apply globally, but how they are used locallyvaries depending on field and site-specific characteristics such assoil, cropping system, management techniques and climate. The scientificprinciples of the 4R framework include:

RIGHT SOURCE—Ensure a balanced supply of essential nutrients,considering both naturally available sources and the characteristics ofspecific products, in plant available forms.

RIGHT RATE—Assess and make decisions based on soil nutrient supply andplant demand.

RIGHT TIME—Assess and make decisions based on the dynamics of cropuptake, soil supply, nutrient loss risks, and field operation logistics.

RIGHT PLACE—Address root-soil dynamics and nutrient movement and managespatial variability within the field to meet site-specific crop needsand limit potential losses from the field.

In retrospect, it is now clear that the industrial farming complexbecame distracted from the importance of organic compound cycling whenit was discovered that soluble acidic based nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P)and potassium (K) “fertilizers” could stimulate plant growth. Toanalogize, industrial farming has developed the same psychology thatmany people themselves fall victim to when visiting their familyphysician and has been treating the symptoms while ignoring underlyingcauses which continue to worsen.

There is an immediate connection between applying the right nutrientsource, at the right rate, right timing, and right placements, andbeneficial impacts on components of the natural capital evidencedthrough better crop performance, improved soil health, decreasedenvironmental pollution, and the protection of wildlife.

Similarly, positive effects are expected on financial capital, as farmerprofits improve, bringing about improvement in their quality of life andincreased economic activity in their communities.

Soils abused by over-application of this anhydrous ammonia and by otherdestructive farming practices which destroy humic substance can shortenresidence times of humic substances by several hundred years. Forcontext, the turnover time of organic carbon added each year from plantand animal residues averages approximately 30 years, under idealconditions.

To make matters worse, since N P K fertilizers typically have beenrelatively inexpensive in comparison to other farm costs and haveremained low relative to corn prices, one of the United States largestcash crops, application of N P K fertilizers at rates in excess of plantneed is common as farmers will tend to hedge against even a perceivedrisk of insufficient N. Continued use of these acidic fertilizers in theabsence of adequate humic substances is only now being understood tocreate downstream ecological problems which now must be addressedthemselves.

N Fertilizer Overapplication is a Common Problem, Counter-productive,Toxic to Environment, Application of Humic Substances Directly CounterThese Issues

For years the conventional thinking has been that application ofsynthetic nitrogen fertilizers improved soil carbon while producing morecrops. Research data from the Morrow Plots, the oldest research plots inthe country, now indicates the opposite at work and a measurable declinein soil carbon can be linked to the use of synthetic N fertilization.

Further, it is now observable that the overuse of synthetic nitrogencauses a “nitrogen cascade” resulting in imbalances in the naturalecosystem by disrupting the desirable and necessary soil microbialcommunities which in turn only exacerbates problems. See FIG. 14 .

Finally, excess N has been shown to speed up the natural decompositionrate of organic matter and humus, and physically changes the soilstructure itself. The resulting soil will have less pore space and lesssponge like qualities and therefore be less efficient at storingnutrients, water and air. This typically results in a farmer applyingmore fertilizer and requiring more irrigation needed to maintain thesame crop yield seen in previous years, which in turn both requires moreenergy and which brings additional GHG output with it.

This negative impact of these fertilizers on soil health and plantgrowth has been shown to be reversable by augmenting or replacing theuse of these synthetic fertilizers with humic substances.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency has accessed humus andcurrently recognizes humate and humic acid as naturally occurring,organic materials or substances, commonly associated with coal, ligniteand mudstones, non-toxic to both human health and the environment. TheAgency believes that both humic acids and potassium salts arepractically non-toxic to mammals. Due to the ubiquitous nature of thesenaturally occurring materials, and the high molecular weights of thehumic materials, no chronic or acute effects are expected to occur.There is also no available information to indicate that these naturallyoccurring substances are carcinogenic, mutagenic, or expected to haveany effect on the immune or endocrine systems. As such, humic substancesare considered exempt from a requirement of a maximum applicationtolerance and overapplication does not carry with it the same downstreamhealth issues seen in N P K fertilizers.

Further, when adequate humic substances are present within the soil therequirement for N P K fertilizer applications is significantly reduced.As the level of humic substances in soils become depleted the misleadingdemand for higher concentrations of N P K results.

Many growers have over the past several years reported increasingdemands for soluble acid fertilizer in order to maintain crop yields.Such observations indicate something is wrong within the soil and itscomposition and additional, increased applications of N P K fertilizersis both misplaced and counterproductive.

Further, increased leaching of nitrate fertilizer ingredients into theground water is also a warning of problems to come. These symptomsreflect the losses in soil humic substances.

As discussed, the uptake of major plant nutrients is mediated by humicsubstances. One stimulative effect of humic substances on plant growthis enhanced uptake of the major plant nutrients: nitrogen (N) phosphorus(P), and potassium (K). As such, in soil with elevated N P K levels,humic substances will enhance a plant's ability to uptake and processthese excess nutrients into inert or significantly less detrimentalelements and compounds, and eventually rehabilitate and stabilize thesoil.

Growers could reduce their future fertilizer requirements and retain thefertilizer ingredients already existing within the plant's rooting zoneby the application of humate based fertilizers. The application ofeither dry or liquid humic substances to soils has been demonstrated todramatically increases fertilizer efficiency.

Growers, however first need to implement production practices whichprevent the decomposition and deterioration of existing humic substanceswithin their soils. Growers also need to develop practices which improvethe residence time of humic substances. It is essential that growersmove towards avoiding destructive fertilization practices, rotate cropsconsistently, minimize their pesticide usage, avoid deep plowing, andmix crop residues back into the topsoil using minimum tillage practices.Soils which contain adequate humic substances have improved tilth(workability) and are thus more efficiently maintained for cropproduction.

The transitioning of unhealthy agricultural soils and pre-reclamationsites nationwide from their present state to a more natural conditionwhere organic matter and humus is sufficient will require soilamendments to restore optimal soil conditions. The replacement of thenitrogen with humic products as described carries no adverse effect oncrop yields or quality; yet provides the benefits of less nitrous oxideemissions, less water use, and less nitrogen run-off in the form ofnitrate from fields into the watershed. In the agricultural arena thisconcept is known as “additionality”, meaning that there are no adverseeffects to a crop by replacing nitrogen fertilizer with a humic product.

Further, a farmer who reduces N output from their soils, will also bereducing C output that would have as a natural course flowed from theirprevious water and energy demands as they can now effectively sustainthe same yields with less effort.

Incentivizing Farmers to Change Longstanding Practices, Habits, andBehavior

The farmer, the manager of the land, is the final decision-maker inselecting the practice suited to local site-specific soil, weather, andcrop production conditions, and local regulations that have the highestprobability of meeting the goals.

Because these local conditions can influence the decision on thepractice selected, right up to and including the day of implementation,local decision-making with the right decision support information wouldperform better than a centralized regulatory approach.

Ideally the assessment of practice performance would be done on thebasis of all indicators considered important to incentivizers and whathas been set forth by the 4R Nutrient Stewardship concept. Essentially,this becomes the practice of adaptive management—an ongoing process ofdeveloping improved practices for efficient production and resourceconservation by use of participatory learning through continuoussystematic assessment.

While humic substances offer a solution as to the issues of soil itself,the problem then turns to adaptation and participation. How do youincentivize farmers to change their behavior with minimal disruption totheir current operating practices without incurring substantial orprohibitive costs?

One thought has been the creation of greenhouse gas credit programs,which reward observed behavior and reduction of greenhouse gas outputwith credits that may be redeemed against gas output from otheractivities.

The advent of nitrogen GHG credit programs such as the Delta Institute'sNitrogen Credit Program (NCP) can generate additional revenue for afarmer adopting a nutrient stewardship strategy aimed at reducing totalN fertilizer applied to their crops. In many of these credit programs,the credits themselves carry ownership rights and the credits themselvesare bought and sold, often being applied by disparate industries whoseoperating practices cannot be further optimized to lower emissions.

In successive meta-analyses of available field data, simple ratios havebeen developed to relate the amount of N fertilizer applied to croplandsto subsequent emissions of N2O. The current global mean value forfertilizer-induced N2O emissions (synthetic and manure)—derived fromover 1,000 agricultural field studies—is ˜0.9% or 0.009. In short, forevery 100 kg of N fertilizer applied, 0.9 kg of N in the form of N2O—Nis assumed to be emitted directly into the atmosphere.

MSU and EPRI developed an N2O offsets accounting “protocol” or“methodology.” It is the only offsets methodology in the world todaypublished in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. The MSU-EPRI N2OOffsets Protocol is based on the empirical relationship observed inregionally based studies of the relationship between fertilizer nitrogenrate and N2O emissions. This relationship provides us the basis for thedevelopment of a transparent, scientifically robust offset protocol thatcan be used by developers of agricultural offset projects to createexchangeable GHG emission reduction credits for U.S. carboncap-and-trade markets.

By combining the N2O emissions predicted using the MSU-EPRI N2O OffsetsProtocol with a recently developed approach for applying economicallyoptimized nitrogen input rates to corn, called the maximum return tonitrogen (MRTN), the protocol provides the basis for incentivizing N2Oreductions without adversely affecting crop yields. The protocol uses anIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change “Tier 2” approach based on aregional N2O emissions factor that was derived from eight site years'worth of N2O emissions data measured from field studies conducted at KBSand on commercial farms in Michigan. Tier 2 emissions factors can alsobe used to credit practices other than fertilizer rate reduction thatreduce N2O emissions. While nitrogen fertilizer rate is the bestpredictor of N2O flux, a reduction in rate can also reflect the effectsof, for example, adopting improved fertilizer timing and placement, andthe use of nitrification inhibitors.

FIG. 15 illustrates an equation and its graph of Observed MathematicalRelationship Between Applied Fertilizer Rate and Observed NitrogenDioxide Emission. The equation shows the currently accepted equationsused to compute N2O emissions per year based upon nitrogen applicationrates. Tier 2 is the latest and better equation shown as the exponentialcurve in the graph versus the liner Tier 1 equation.

Compute carbon offsets produced on farming project by computing twovalues using the Tier 2 equation: one for the normal N application rateand one for the reduced nitrogen rate. The N application rate reductionis shown by “B” and the N2O reduction is shown by “A” on the graph. Thedifference in the two calculated values is the N2O reduction in kg/yr.This value is converted to metric tons per year by dividing by 1000(1000 kg/mT) and then multiplied by 298 to convert to CO2 equivalent.The result is metric tons of CO2 equivalent greenhouse emissions perhectare. One metric ton of CO2 is defined as one carbon offset.

By using this modeling, GHG credits can now be accurately dispensedaccording to a farmer's actions and what they may have done, or added totheir soil or, importantly, reduction in other behaviors.

Therein however, are many problems that must first be addressed whencreating something as enigmatic and intangible as a carbon credit systemif one expects people to equate credits with the same reverence as gold,oil, or other physical commodities that the markets are currentlycomfortable and familiar with. A protocol must be designed which cansomehow observe and track behavior and then reward that behavior with acredit that has been tracked, validated and is trusted, as these creditsexist only in ledger books and may represent actions and behaviors offarmers that are distant from purchasers both in physical distance andtime.

Problems with Current Credit Markets Overview

Compliance and Voluntary Green House Gas and Water Quality Trading(“WQT”) markets exist in the United States and globally. “Compliancemarkets” are comprised of the trading of credits and offsetting ofgreenhouse gas emissions by countries that are legally bound to complywith the Kyoto Protocol. Outside of these markets, greenhouse gas offsetcredits can be traded in the voluntary market by any citizen orinstitution looking to offset their greenhouse gas emissions. Withinthese markets the responsibility falls on individual companies to tradecredits with each other. The intent is to ensure the free market(private sector) determines the least costly emission cuts.

While the free market solution has worked for other sectors, growthwithin the compliance markets has been slow, far too slow to provide theglobal solution necessary to stave off global warming.

Offsetting one ton of nitrogen with a nitrogen credit means there willbe one less ton of nitrogen dioxide in the atmosphere than there wouldotherwise have been. By purchasing GHG credits to offset theiremissions, businesses contribute essential finance to renewable energy,forest protection and reforestation projects around the world that wouldnot otherwise be financially viable. While this seems like it would bedesirable and businesses that can't reduce their own carbon emissionswould create a steady supply of customers for the carbon credit market,this hasn't translated to the real world. These separate third parties,those not directly involved in the credit creation scheme, have beenreticent to invest and speculate on such an intangible commodity,stemming from prevalent fraud within this market, as well as just a lackof trust in what the carbon credits purport to be backed by.

As such, the market is viewed as more of a niche market, and one thatstill requires substantial investment in the form of government andprivate donation.

Water quality trading is another innovative market-based approach thatallows permitted dischargers (such as power plants) to purchase nutrientreduction credits from sources such as farmers. When designed well andcombined with other watershed efforts, WQT can help keep water clean ina way that benefits landowners, communities and the environment.

Typically, farmers implement conservation practices that reduce soilerosion and runoff, generating a credit. A buyer (e.g., a permittedsource such as a municipal wastewater facility) purchases these waterquality improvements, or credits, from farmers. The transactioncompensates the farmers for the costs of their conservation practiceswhile improving the overall health of the environment. Participation inthese markets has progressed somewhat better than the carbon market,likely lending to that simply water is a more critical issue forfarmers, a reduction in tonnage of water more readily observed, andunlike soil, a fertilizer or additive cannot be added to water to simplyskate past deeper underlying water quality.

However, because this market tracks observable behavior on the part ofparticipants, this market suffers many of the same trust and fraudissues which have overall had a throttling effect.

The Carbon trading market is the world's fastest growing commoditiesmarket. As it continues to emphasize, unlike traditional tangiblecommodities however, the advent of “carbon”, “nitrogen” and “water”credits or offsets, it has created a new international commodity that isintangible and exists only in ledgers. Considering both the speed andthe influx of money involved in these new “intangible asset” markets,especially carbon trading, the potential for fraud has been high, andsidelines many conservative investors and participants.

Interpol, in its June 2013 report titled “Guide to Carbon TradingCrime”, identified five areas ripe for fraud within the carbon markets:

1. fraudulent manipulation of measurements to claim more carbon creditsfrom a project that were actually obtained;

2. sale of carbon credits that either do not exist or belong to someoneelse;

3. false or misleading claims with respect to the environmental orfinancial benefits of carbon market investments;

4. exploitation of weak regulations in the carbon market to commitfinancial crimes, such as money laundering, securities fraud or taxfraud; and

5. computer hacking/phishing to steal carbon credits and theft ofpersonal information.

The Disclosed Life Cycle Approach Protocol Solves the Potentiality ofFraud While Enabling Significant Tracking and of Credit Genesis andTracking of Corresponding Chain of Title

Like any traditional commodity market, within these intangible assetmarkets, every asset (offset) must be identifiable and trackable toensure market integrity or participants will be reluctant or evendisincentivized to participate. Genuine carbon standards must be set,with the goal of providing assurances to buyers that the emissionsreductions generated by a particular project are indeed real andquantifiable.

While there are registries such as the Gold Standard and VerifiableCarbon Registry that take efforts to assure that all its projects meetrobust and stringent methodology requirements for sustainabledevelopment in the local area, none of these registries provide anaccurate Chain of Title or accurate Life Cycle Approach to the offsetsthey track. This has led to persistent fraud in these voluntary markets.

Because a variety of industries can benefit from either the direct orindirect use of humate substances to attain carbon, nitrogen and/orwater offsets, linking this tangible asset—“humate” to the corresponding“intangible” offsets is critical.

A “Life Cycle Approach” (LCA) will minimize the potential for fraudrelated to GHG reduction via humate by tracking a credit created underthe LCA from “cradle to grave” tracking the entire chain of custody andother historical data of note along the way until the credits eventuallyare retired.

An effective LCA approach will be able link the tangible asset andprecursors—humus from the initial mining, to refinement, to commercialproduct (humic substances refined for purposes of crop fertilizer), tointangible behaviors, in this case the farmer using said fertilizer andsubsequent testing verifying the reduction of greenhouse gases, to whatis an intangible asset—the offset in a ledger which represents thesecombined efforts. The value of the intangible asset, the credit, is nowundeniably enhanced due to now carrying with it the same sort of titlethat is seen in real property transactions. Further, because thedescribed inventive protocol contemplates the consensus drivenarchitecture borrowed from blockchain, the title that these creditscarry with them not only reassures a potential downstream purchaser thatthese credits carry clean title, but the credits themselves are nowfraud resistant, as it is difficult if not impossible for bad actors tosimply create assets on a blockchain, the consensus protocol simplydismisses bad data and fraudulent or suspect nodes.

What is required to do this however is an asset management/trackingsystem that would assign an identification number or string (ID) to aunit of humate creating with it a “Chain-of-Title” that geographicallyidentifies where the humate originated, the characteristics of thathumate unit (sample analysis), the movement, the use (purpose andlocation), the linkage to any corresponding offset (carbon, nitrogen,and/or water) and the final disposition.

Every GHG credit that is generated by way of the disclosed protocol isconsidered unique and has a single use identification number or stringassigned to it, allowing the unique credit to be tracked from cradle tocredit issuance to eventual retirement.

As such, when a business subsequently purchases these GHG credits tooffset its emissions, these GHG credits have been accounted for througha through a consensus driven network of third-party registries thataccount for discrepancies. This operates to ensure that the retirementof these distinct GHG credits have been validated and that a businesscan with greater granularity that before, trace the credits that theyreduced to date, site location, and even the source of the humus thatwas applied. The additional benefit is that this same system ensuresthat the same unique credit cannot be sold to anyone else and that allcredits are valid unless considered redeemed.

In addition to providing a proof of application of these products, thissame protocol allows for verification of the correct application ofprescriptive humic and bio-stimulant products is required and thedisclosed architecture even allows for tracking of granularity down tothe specific formulation that

A method to assure application rate is required through the use oftaggants. The Compliance Markets are more robust but the method oftagging the project intentions with the project verifiable results arestill missing or significantly neglected. Now that appropriatenanomaterials consisting of organic phase change products and otherinorganic materials are commercially available and feasible, validationof application rates are now assured.

Verification can now be accomplished using sensors checking for organicsolid to liquid phase changing nanoparticles of various types andmelting temperatures which have been added to the naturally occurringmaterials, providing a unique, natural “barcode”. Or, in thealternative, as described the composition of humus comes from a widevariety of sub-compounds and particles such that it is feasible that theidentified structures alone are enough to provide markers for subsequentmeasurement and detection.

Further, while other non-organic materials are currently available astaggants, the organic tags as contemplated are natural, biodegradableand safe for the environment, thus allowing for taggant use andverification during all stages.

The addition of these materials can later be collected from soil samplesor plant materials to validate the application of humic and fulvicproducts.

The verification of product quality and application is a requirement tovalidate benefits known as ISO/TC 134. ISO/TC 134 offers an analyticalprocedure for humic and fulvic acid which is currently under review bythe Humic Products Trade Association (HPTA), International HumicSubstance Society (IHSS), and California Department of Food &Agriculture (CDFA). Because at its core this invention also aims to be a“green” endeavor, additional consideration and standards for productquality may also be sourced from the Organic Materials Review Institute(OMRI), which provides organic certifiers, growers, manufacturers, andsuppliers an independent review of products intended for use incertified organic production, handling, and processing. When companiesapply, OMRI reviews their products against the USDA Organic or CanadaOrganic Regime standards.

Further, inherent to the disclosed LCA protocol, alongside the taggant,tracking, and verification protocol is a pre and post analysis of soilbiochemistry. This allows for verification that the humic substanceswere applies and green house gas reduction achieved, but additionallyserves as building a historical database such that it is notunreasonable to believe that formulation of customized and optimalfertilizers will eventually be able to be a prescriptive process thatonly requires an initial sample test of a particular field'scharacteristics. Eventually the protocol in addition to tracking andverification can be leveraged and soil amendment formulation that suitsa particular end-user's requirement can be created with minimalintervention while moving soil conditions to what is most optimal forthat particular location, crop, and or purpose. Similarly, not unlike avisit to your physician, it becomes far easier to track what has beentried, what has worked, and if additional treatments are necessary, morespecific and targeted treatments can be formulated and applied toachieve best results.

By optimizing formulation, the disclosed protocol addressed currentproblems with over-application of products that may be a waste of moneyor not wholly appropriate, while also addressing potentially far morepressing problems such as soil toxicity for what may be a inappropriatefertilizer formulation.

Ultimately, to ensure the purchase of high-quality carbon offsets, it isimperative that companies pursue offsets that have been subjected torigorous third-party monitoring, reporting and verification procedures.

As previously noted, and emphasized, given the potential for bad actorsit is important that participants in a carbon credit market are able tosource carbon credits from a reputable offset supplier who can offertransparency in terms of the projects, pricing and retirement of thecarbon credits. The disclosed protocol is designed to both address thetracking of the application of humic products, while also measuring thecorresponding reduction of application of nitrogen-based fertilizers andwater quality and water savings while also providing for efficient, lowcost, continuous 3^(rd) party blind or double-blind monitoring andvalidation of the GHG credits that are being created, exchanged, sold,and eventually retired within the system.

Blockchain Protocol

The disclosed protocol is designed to track a vast number of relevantdata points, and then using a block chain architecture or a modifiedblock chain multichain architecture, the disclosed protocol is then ableto ensure the validity of information on that chain.

In simple terms, the standard blockchain can be described as anappend-only transaction ledger. What that means is that the ledger canbe written onto with new information, but the previous information,stored in blocks, cannot be edited, adjusted or changed. This isaccomplished by using cryptography to link the contents of the newlyadded block with each block before it, such that any change to thecontents of a previous block in the chain would invalidate the data inall blocks after it.

Blockchains, as it is reasonable to infer from previous discussion, aretypically consensus driven. Recording transactions through blockchainvirtually eliminates human error and protects the data from possibletampering and accounts for bad data. Records are continuously beingaccessed and monitored and are verified every single time they arepassed on from one blockchain node to the next, usually by checking whatis about to be sent against other existing copies on other nodes withinthe network. In addition to the guaranteed accuracy of your records,such a process also leave a highly traceable audit trail shouldforensics be necessary later to determine causality within the system.

In terms of physical structure, a large number of computers areconnected to the network, and to reduce the ability for an attacker tomaliciously add transactions on the network, those adding to theblockchain must compete to solve a mathematical proof. The results areshared with all other computers on the network. The computers, or nodes,connected to this network must agree on the solution, hence the term“consensus.”

If an irregularity is detected somewhere along the supply chain, ablockchain system can lead you all the way to its point of origin. Thismakes it easier for businesses to carry out investigations and executethe necessary actions. For example, one use-case for blockchain trackingwould be the food sector, where tracking the origination, batchinformation and other important details is crucial for quality assuranceand safety.

This also makes the work of appending data to the ledger decentralized.That is, no single entity can take control of the information on theblockchain. Therefore, one need not trust a single entity since thesystem is predicated on the reliance and agreement of many computersspread across what are likely and ideally wholly separate entities. Thebeauty of this construct is that the transactions recorded in the chaincan be publicly published and verified, such that anyone can view thecontents of the blockchain and verify that events that were recordedinto it actually took place.

In layman's terms, the blockchain is a virtual, public ledger thatrecords everything in a secure and transparent manner. Unlike banks thatfacilitate transactions with traditional currencies, the blockchainallows the free transfer of data through a decentralized environment,typically in exchange for a cryptocurrency reward to incentivizeparticipation and the creation of numerous nodes across the network.Rather than maintaining separate records, businesses are only requiredto keep a single, joint register, which in and of itself may notrepresent all the data. Potentially many nodes only contain the datathat is relevant to the work occurring on those nodes, or may onlycontain limited data because of the slow connection or processing powerof that particular node. By employing such an architecture and thenapplying it to recorded data, the integrity of a company's financialinformation is also guaranteed. All the data is held across aninterlinked network of computers, owned and run by none other than theusers themselves. This has an additional benefit of giving the networkan organic structure, whereby as some nodes go offline due to downtimeor issues unique to those nodes, other nodes may be added, giving thenetwork stability unavailable to a centralized record keeping system.

Specifically, for supply chain management, the blockchain technologyoffers the benefits of traceability and cost-effectiveness. Put simply,a blockchain can be used to track the movement of goods, their origin,quantity and so forth. This brings about a new level of transparency toB2B ecosystems—simplifying processes such as ownership transfer,production process assurance and payments.

Disclosed Multichain and Improvements to Blockchain Architecture

The disclosed protocol borrows several foundational principles fromblockchain architecture, but there are several limitations blockchain,and some specific to the problem being address, such that it may benecessary to build upon the protocol to achieve the desiredparticipation in the contemplated improved carbon credit markets.

Number of Chains

a) As mentioned above, most blockchain, like Bitcoin, are a singleledger. This means that the entire Bitcoin network is focused on threetasks 1) nodes looking to the current block, and waiting for a solutionto that block that the network agrees upon, 2) nodes participating inconsensus, 3) and nodes with portions of ledger stored sending copies ofledger out to new nodes so the new nodes can be established. When datais added, this data is added to the main blockchain, and waits forconsensus to confirm or discard.

Multichain as the name should quickly communicate, allows for numerouschains, or streams. There is still a main blockchain within multichainthat the additional sidechains or streams all point towards, and thismain blockchain can be thought of as the master copy.

However, unlike blockchain, multichain enables the main blockchain to bemore of a reference source than a working area. While some manipulationcan and will occur on the central chain in the multichain structure, thethought is that the system can be better optimized if some processes areallowed to occur on side chains, and once side chain processes providedata that is validated and ready to enter into the main blockchain, afinal clean copy of the results of the side-chain process are enteredone time into the main blockchain, with a pointer established to theside process if someone later wishes that the side-process “show itswork”.

One of the weaknesses that has begun to emerge in many of the blockchainprotocols is the issue of bloating file sizes. As a traditionalblockchain will contain all data, and everything that occurred, there isoften a lot of unnecessary data that begins to add onto the overall filesize.

Using the disclosed protocol, a side chain may be created when a processis occurring that may not necessarily be important to the rest of thenetwork. Then, when that process works itself out and resolves, it hasbeen considered that many times a simplified or cleaned up data set isall that the rest of the network requires.

As such, in the multichain environment, a process can resolve on asidechain or stream, at which time a smaller consensus occurs. Ifamongst that local consensus the data is considered to be “good” andready to enter into the main blockchain, the sidechain can be closedout. The sidechain may be stored, but only the “good” data is added tothe main blockchain and then distributed to the rest of the network.

This works to keep the main blockchain optimized, and easier to workwith and access while still allowing for forensics if someone wishes totrace back and check events.

While this does introduce some rigidity into the architecture, that is,some of these multichains may only exist as backups on a limited numberof nodes, there are means to address that, perhaps by denoting “power”nodes on the network, those with the storage capacity that are willingto be sidechain archivists, but the benefits of a cleaner blockchain andallowing more dynamic sidechain “work spaces” seems more than worth it.

Decentralization

a) Blockchains are decentralized so there is no need for a trusted thirdparty or intermediary to validate transactions; instead a consensusmechanism is used to agree on the validity of transactions.

The disclosed multichain protocol does not modify this as this is one ofthe principle reasons for and benefits of using blockchain.

Transparency of Data

b) Blockchains are shared and everyone can be allowed to what is on theblockchain, which serves to establish transparency and trust.

While often times the data on blockchain may be encrypted, it is notuncommon for the data to be raw and viewable, or for web-basedblockchain explorers to be available. The contemplated protocol mayemploy either raw or encrypted data or some combination of both as theremay be sensitive data or corporate clients that wish that at least somedata be obfuscated.

Immutability

c) Typically, once the data enters the blockchain it comes in discreetchunks, “blocks”, which may relate either to a particular action thatoccurred or may just be representative of a ceiling limit on individualblock sizes. It is extremely difficult to change it back often requiringa threshold consensus. Occasionally the term “51% attack” is mentionedin blockchain news, and specific to Bitcoin, occurs when 51% of minersto conspire to change block.

Multichain, as implemented in the disclosed multichain protocol isconfigurable and the current design provides for that after a set numberof blocks, for example every 10 blocks, everything is considered to beset in stone in the chain.

The effect of this is two-fold, by making it possible for the timingwindow for nodes to object to a particular block relatively narrow, itraises what is required of a 51% attack. Now instead of merely staging acoup with a majority of nodes/miners, the revolt must also be swift.While it doesn't eliminate the possibility of a blitz, it increases theamount of effort and speed required.

Second, by keeping a narrow window to object, it adds reassurance andstability to the blockchain itself. Now if data is older than the 10blocks in our example, this data is locked and unquestionable.

Transaction Integrity and Security

Blockchain transactions are typically cryptographically secured andprovide integrity. Transactions are also essentially duplicated acrossall ledgers, so the system is not vulnerable to data crashes.

The contemplated multichain protocol operates effectively the same,whereby every active node has a copy of the data or may request a copyof the data if it hasn't received one. As stated, this may not always bedesired, the computer file holding the chain can get quite large. When anode first connects to the network, it requests an update from itspeers. The longest chain in blocks received from the network is used asthe current truth.

Multichain sidechains would work the same way. By only requesting whatis necessary or required, a single problem may be broken up with greatergranularity than what is achievable on a single blockchain.

Unlike past accounting ledgers where multiple entities maintain and havetheir own databases which causes all kinds of problems, blockchainprovides a single digital ledger available to all parties; butmultichain goes a step further by having a database on each node thatcan index transaction in various blocks and form a relationship. Theseare called a stream. Each steam appears to be a separate ledger but isactually a subset of the block chain.

Transaction Speeds

The Bitcoin network runs on a set of previously-agreed-upon rules thatare built into the Bitcoin client software.

One such rule is that the difficulty should be changed every 2016 blocksto make a new block take, on average, 10 minutes to mine. As theeconomics change, miners will startup and shutdown making the averageblock take more or less than 10 minutes to find but the next timeanother 2016th block is mined, the difficulty will again be re-adjusted.

Bitcoin and many of its derivatives can be relative slow. There issignificant work and cost involved in its proof of work, requiring largehigh-power computers with specialized hardware. This is because anyonecan “mine blocks”, so there is a difficult math problem to solve whichmakes the validation of blocks (which are a consolidated set oftransactions) costly. Miners make the calculations to solve the problemand validate the transactions, and then add the block to the chain.There is a race to solve the problem, and only the miner that solves theproblem is rewarded with the mined Bitcoin.

For that reason, there are additional fees paid to miners whosuccessfully solve the math problem by those who post transactions.These fees are in addition to the preprogrammed fees created by theblockchain to increase the total amount of currency available (the feesare decreasing over time and will eventually go to zero so the maxnumber of Bitcoins will be around 21 million). Miners collect all of thefees contained in the transactions that comprise the block. Because themath problem is so difficult, transactions can take more than 10 minutesto be verified and the math problem are designed from the start togradually get more difficult.

Multichain has a feature that allows the chain administrator to specifywho can mine and the math problems are much less difficult to solve. Thethought here is that there is benefit to vetting miners on the frontend,so that the initial miners can create a trusted pool.

Miners merely make the simple calculations to solve the problem andvalidate the transactions, and then add the block to the chain. There isa race to solve the easy problem, but it is done such that the work isspread around the approved miners—every miner gets a turn at validatingblocks. With multichain, the current goal is a transaction time ofaround a minute.

This substantial difference between architectures stems from intendeddesign of the rewards, or coins or tokens that are rewarded.

Within Bitcoin and many other currencies, there is an established limitof coins. As stated, Bitcoin is designed to only ever allow for 21million Bitcoins to exist. These coins however derive their value fromsheer existence, and the coins themselves are what are bought and sold,being sent to unique addresses to be stored until someone spends thecoin by sending it to a new address.

Within the disclosed multichain protocol, it has been established thatcoins have a life cycle. The coins are created, and like Bitcoin theymay move around from address to address being bought and sold; butcritically, unlike Bitcoin, the tokens within the multichain protocolare intended to be eventually redeemed and then lose all value. The realworld offset that a unique coin represented are eventually appliedagainst a business's output, but then by design is voided and neverintended to be bought or sold again.

As such, there is not a need within the disclosed protocol to ramp updifficulty in order to maintain rarity and increasing difficulty wouldonly punish those who created nodes on the network later than others,while a round-robin simple approach maintains fairness.

Further, because the coins created within the disclosed protocol areonly created when significant actions have occurred in the physicalworld, in this case a farmer amending their field soil chemistry andsubsequent measurements and verifications of his actions have occurred,there is less concern of a bad actor attempting to simply create andissue credits to themselves.

Further, Bitcoin does not add transactions in order. Transactions arequeued and distributed to all nodes on the network. Miners themselvesthen select transactions from the queue, attempting to maximize theirfees. Eventually, all transactions are processed, but it may take morethan a block cycle time, or a party wishing to transact can offer to paya higher fee to the miners to get priority processing, creatingeffectively a pay-to-play system.

In the disclosed multichain, there are no mining fees, so transactionsare taken in sequence from the node's transaction queue. Unfortunately,each node cannot guarantee the queue receives transactions in the sameorder as another because of network latency, delays, and disconnects.

Objective of the Invention

It is an object of this invention to tether and verify nontraditionalledger-based commodities, in this case GHG credits and WQT credits, byutilizing an LCA that addresses the creation, validation, monitoring,and retirement of carbon credits that have been directly linked to theutilization of humic substances in soil rehabilitation efforts.

It is a further object of this invention that such an LCA wouldcontemplate the application of a fertilizer amendment to soil, in thiscase the substitution or addition of humic substances as to traditionalN based synthetic fertilizers, and participants within this system wouldbe rewarded with title to carbon credits that they may then use, store,or sell.

It is a further object of this invention such that the contemplated GHGand/or WQT credits would be generated based upon the calculatedreduction of nitrogen oxide that would have otherwise occurred, or theverifiable water savings or improvement affected as a result of thefarmers' participation in the LCA program and treating their soils withthese humic substance based amendments.

It is further an object of this invention that by validating andtracking the life cycle of GHG/WQT credits that fraud, error, and othermalfeasance may be addressed and eliminated, increasing marketconfidence and participation and incentivizing and creating forwardmomentum within these markets to better address concerns as to theplanet increasing in temperature due in part to human activity which hasadded additional greenhouse gases to the planet's atmosphere.

It is further an object of this invention to provide for improvements toblockchain architecture which address problems inherent in standardblockchain design as well as problems specific in creating a blockchain,multichain, or other such blockchain variant for the purposes ofissuance, tracking and retirement of carbon credits.

SUMMARY

In one aspect of the invention, a method of formulating novel humicmaterial is disclosed comprising: mixing one or more portions ofDimethylphenylpiperazinium (DMPP) with one or more portions ofN—(N-butyl) thiophosphoric triamide (NBPT) to form a portion ofnon-organic biostimulant material; obtaining a portion of seaweedharvest and crushing and drying the portion of seaweed to form a portionof seaweed powder; obtaining a portion of mined material and crushingthe portion of mined material to form a portion of humic raw material;mixing one or more portion of animal manure with one or more portion ofstover with one or more portion of organic waste to form a portion ofcompositing mix and composting the compositing mix to form a portion ofcomposted product; obtaining a portion of plant waste and subjecting theportion of plant waste through an anaerobic combustion to form a portionof bio char; mixing the portion of bio char with the portion ofcomposted product with the portion of humic raw material to form aportion of humic processed material; mixing the humic processed materialwith the portion of non-organic biostimulant material to form a portionof biostimulant humic product; adding a taggant to the portion ofbiostimulant humic product to form a portion of tagged biostimulanthumic product; mixing one or more portion of phosphorus with a portionof potassium and a portion of nitrogen and a portion of trace mineralsto form portion of raw fertilizer; mixing the portion of raw fertilizerwith the portion of tagged biostimulant humic product to form a portionof tagged fertilized biostimulant humic product.

In one embodiment, the portion of humic processed material is in powderform. In one embodiment, the portion of humic processed material is inliquid form. In one embodiment, the method of formulating novel humicmaterial further comprising analyzing the tagged fertilized biostimulanthumic product and generating a tagged fertilized biostimulant humicproduct report outlining the analysis and associating the taggedfertilized biostimulant humic product report to the tagged fertilizedbiostimulant humic product. In one embodiment, the method of formulatingnovel humic material further comprising identifying a portion offarmland and analysis a portion of soil of the farm land to generate asoil sample report of the portion of farm land and associating the soilsample report to the portion of farm land. In one embodiment, the methodof formulating novel humic material further comprising applying taggedfertilized biostimulant humic product to the portion of farmland andgrow agriculture crop on the portion of farm land.

In one embodiment, the method of formulating novel humic materialfurther comprising collecting a yield data of the crop to generate ayield report and analyze the yield report to verify the application ofthe tagged fertilized biostimulant humic product by comparing the yieldreport to the soil sample report and to the fertilized biostimulanthumic product report and generating a carbon credit document for theapplication of the tagged fertilized biostimulant humic product.

In one embodiment, the carbon credit document is associated with theyield report and the soil report and the fertilized biostimulant humicproduct report. In one embodiment, the process of forming a portion ofnon-organic biostimulant material further comprising mixing with one ormore portions of Isobutylidene-diurea (IBDU). In one embodiment, theprocess of forming a portion of non-biostimulant material furthercomprising mixing with one or more portions of with one or more portionsof Polyaspartic Acid. In one embodiment, the process of forming aportion of non-organic biostimulant material further comprising mixingwith one or more portions of Chitosan. In one embodiment, the process offorming a portion of non-organic biostimulant material furthercomprising mixing with one or more portions of Mycorrhizae.

In one embodiment, the process of forming a portion of non-organicbiostimulant material further comprising mixing with one or moreportions of Rhizobia. In one embodiment, the mined material is selectedfrom a group consisting of Leonardite, oxidized lignite, carbonaceousshales, and humates. In one embodiment, in the method of associating thereport to the tagged fertilized biostimulant humic product is selectedfrom a group consisting of utilizing blockchain data synchronization andutilizing multichain data synchronization.

In one embodiment, in the method of associating the report to the taggedfertilized biostimulant humic product is selected from a groupconsisting of utilizing blockchain data synchronization and utilizingmultichain data synchronization. In one embodiment, the method ofassociating the carbon credit document the yield report and the soilreport and the fertilized biostimulant humic product report is selectedfrom a group consisting of utilizing blockchain data synchronization andutilizing multichain data synchronization.

In yet another aspect of the invention, a novel humic material withgreen gas credit prepared by process is disclosed comprising the stepsof mixing one or more portions of Dimethylphenylpiperazinium (DMPP) withone or more portions of N—(N-butyl) thiophosphoric triamide (NBPT) toform a portion of non-organic biostimulant material; obtaining a portionof seaweed harvest and crushing and drying the portion of seaweed toform a portion of seaweed powder; obtaining a portion of mined materialand crushing the portion of mined material to form a portion of humicraw material; mixing one or more portion of animal manure with one ormore portion of stover with one or more portion of organic waste to forma portion of compositing mix and composting the compositing mix to forma portion of composted product; obtaining a portion of plant waste andsubjecting the portion of plant waste through an anaerobic combustion toform a portion of bio char; mixing the portion of bio char with theportion of composted product with the portion of humic raw material toform a portion of humic processed material; mixing the humic processedmaterial with the portion of non-organic biostimulant material to form aportion of biostimulant humic product; adding a taggant to the portionof biostimulant humic product to form a portion of tagged biostimulanthumic product; mixing one or more portion of phosphorus with a portionof potassium and a portion of nitrogen and a portion of trace mineralsto form portion of raw fertilizer; mixing the portion of raw fertilizerwith the portion of tagged biostimulant humic product to form a portionof tagged fertilized biostimulant humic product.

In one embodiment, the portion of humic processed material is in powderform. In one embodiment the portion of humic processed material is inliquid form. In one embodiment in the method of formulating novel humicmaterial further comprising analyzing the tagged fertilized biostimulanthumic product and generating a tagged fertilized biostimulant humicproduct report outlining the analysis and associating the taggedfertilized biostimulant humic product report to the tagged fertilizedbiostimulant humic product. In one embodiment, the method of formulatingnovel humic material further comprising identifying a portion of farmland and analysis a portion of soil of the farm land to generate a soilsample report of the portion of farm land and associating the soilsample report to the portion of farm land.

In one embodiment the method of formulating novel humic material furthercomprising applying tagged fertilized biostimulant humic product to theportion of farmland and grow agriculture crop on the portion offarmland. In one embodiment in the method of formulating novel humicmaterial further comprising collecting a yield data of the crop togenerate a yield report and analyze the yield report to verify theapplication of the tagged fertilized biostimulant humic product bycomparing the yield report to the soil sample report and to thefertilized biostimulant humic product report and generating a carboncredit document for the application of the tagged fertilizedbiostimulant humic product.

In one embodiment the carbon credit document is associated with theyield report and the soil report and the fertilized biostimulant humicproduct report. In one embodiment the process of forming a portion ofnon-organic biostimulant material further comprising mixing with one ormore portions of Isobutylidene-diurea (IBDU). In one embodiment theprocess of forming a portion of non-biostimulant material furthercomprising mixing with one or more portions of with one or more portionsof Polyaspartic Acid. In one embodiment the process of forming a portionof non-organic biostimulant material further comprising mixing with oneor more portions of Chitosan. In one embodiment the process of forming aportion of non-organic biostimulant material further comprising mixingwith one or more portions of Mycorrhizae. In one embodiment the processof forming a portion of non-organic biostimulant material furthercomprising mixing with one or more portions of Rhizobia. In oneembodiment the mined material is selected from a group consisting ofLeonardite, oxidized lignite, carbonaceous shales, and humates. In oneembodiment in the method of associating the report to the taggedfertilized biostimulant humic product is selected from a groupconsisting of utilizing blockchain data synchronization and utilizingmultichain data synchronization. In one embodiment wherein in the methodof associating the report to the tagged fertilized biostimulant humicproduct is selected from a group consisting of utilizing blockchain datasynchronization and utilizing multichain data synchronization.

In one embodiment wherein the method of associating the carbon creditdocument the yield report and the soil report and the fertilizedbiostimulant humic product report is selected from a group consisting ofutilizing blockchain data synchronization and utilizing multichain datasynchronization.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The present invention will be understood and appreciated more fully fromthe following detailed description taken in conjunction with thedrawings in which:

FIG. 1 .—FIG. 1 is a flowchart diagram illustrating the broad top-levelexemplary embodiment of a method for sourcing and refining humicsubstances and reducing them to a fertilizer additive.

FIG. 2 .—Non-organic Biostimulants and Microbial Biostimulant Components(1.1 of FIG. 1 )

FIG. 3 .—Humic products Raw Materials (Humate, Carbon Char, Seaweed,Manure, Stover, Organic Waste) (1.3 of FIG. 1 )

FIG. 4 .—Certified Material and Fertilizer Supplier Distribution (1.10of FIG. 1 )

FIG. 5 .—Multichain Architecture Explained

FIG. 6 —Project Enrollment (1.12 of FIG. 1 )

FIG. 7 . —Project Utilization (1.11 of FIG. 1 )

FIG. 8 —Project Results and Evaluation (awkward wording. Propose justEvaluation) (1.13 of FIG. 1 )

FIG. 9 —Certification and Issuance of Water Credits and Carbon Offsets(1.14 of FIG. 1 )

FIG. 10 —prior art of green house gas emissions by source chart.

FIG. 11 —prior art of principal global carbon pools chart.

FIG. 12 —prior art of bioorganic processes affected by introduction ofhumic substances chart.

FIG. 13 —prior art of the emerging landscape of products chart.

FIG. 14 —prior art of synthetic nitrogen cascade cycle flowchart.

FIG. 15 —prior art of fertilizer N rate equation and chart.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWING

The figures and flowcharts as indicated set forth various embodiments ofthe present invention and are intended to communicate the preferredembodiment of the invention unless otherwise indicated.

Before diving into FIG. 1 itself, it must be observed that critical tothe described invention, and in order to address the problems asdescribed above several necessary sub-processes must be described, indepth, in order to sufficiently address the sourcing and refinement ofhumic substances into a refined biostimulant.

As such, this specification will divulge and describe many of theseprocesses such that a practitioner can understand how to source andproduce the refined biostimulants, and later in the specification, nowthat these manufacturing processes are understood the focus can be thenshifted to the blockchain and multichain architectures and how thesesub-processes and physical materials are accounted for. As it will beexplained further below, many of theses sub-processes have critical“measurement points” where, in a preferred embodiment, data is collectedand entered into the blockchain or multichain to be tracked for variousquantitative or determinative purposes.

To reiterate, in order to address global warming and the problems whichcurrently plague the greenhouse gas credit system which is meant toincentivize GHG reduction, the divulged invention contemplates a systemwhich tracks and verifies these previously ephemeral GHG credits, anddescribes processes which grounds these credits with observable,verifiable physical processes which account for and track a produced GHGcredit from its inception to eventual retirement. By applying this LifeCycle Approach, a carbon credit no longer is something that is createdfrom thin air to exist only in disparate ledgers. By grounding a carboncredit to a real and physical process that is tracked with an electronicrecord that is fraud resistant, the very notion of carbon credit marketscan then be bolstered and traditional issues concerning lack of trust ormutuality dismissed.

With this in mind, FIG. 1 . sets forth a top-level overview flow chartof a preferred embodiment of the invention, indicating the variousprimary processes, some of the critical subprocesses and communicatesthe overall recommended order of operations.

As the invention requires a humic substance derived biostimulant, itmust first be explained what components go into this biostimulant, wherethese components are sourced, and a preferred processing andmanufacturing process described.

The contemplated biostimulant is derived from a combination ofnon-organic biostimulants and microbial soil conditioner components(FIG. 1.1 ); processed humic substances that have been derived from atleast one of a variety of identified raw materials known to containhumic substances (FIG. 1.3 ); and when appropriate, additional tracenutrients (FIG. 1.2 ) that have been deemed lacking in the target soilto be enriched.

As will be explained later when the blockchain/multichain architectureis explained, when a farmer enrolls in the described GHG Credit Awardingprogram, a sample of the initial state of the target soil to be treatedis obtained. It is on the basis of this initial sample, the health ofthe soil can be determined, and in conjunction with the croprequirements, time-line restrictions, and the physical location of thetarget field and expected weather conditions and the like, a recommendedbiostimulant additive formulation can be prescribed and produced, tailormade for the unique circumstances this particular soil would require toachieve the desired health. These check-ups also ensure that the farmeris participating and applying the recommended treatments as prescribed.Put another way, it can be analogized to a doctor attempting to treat asick patient, but with the ability to synthesize medicine designedspecifically for that patient. This alone is something far morebeneficial than the current state of farming which until now has beencontent to farm or fertilize soil until it is either barren or toxic,without even considering the potential to reduce GHG emissions.

The purpose and benefit of creating these tailor-made soil treatmentsexplained, let us return to the contemplated precursor componentsthemselves and examine each individually.

Non-Organic Biostimulants and Microbial Soil Conditioner Components(FIG. 1.1 ; FIG. 2 )

Contemplated non-organic biostimulants and microbial soil conditionercomponents (1.1) are indicated with specificity in subsequent FIG. 2—Non-organic Biostimulants and Microbial Biostimulant Components, andcurrently discloses the inclusion of dimethylphenylpiperazinium (DMPP)(2.1); N—(N-butyl) thiophosphoric triamide (NBPT) (2.2);isubutylidene-diurea (IBDU) (2.3); phosphoric triamide (BNPO) (2.7);polyaspartic acid (2.4); chitosan (CHT) (2.5); mycorrihizae (2.6);rhizobia (2.6); formalized casin (2.7); and/or other chemically similarnon-organic biostimulants (2.7).

DMPP (2.1) is effective during the first step of nitrification. Itreduces the activity of ammonium oxidizing bacteria (represented byNitrosomonas) in the soil, and then hinders the conversion of NH4-N toNO3-N, so as to avoid the leaching or volatilization of nitrogen. It hasno effect on the second step of nitrification, but as long as the firststep of nitrification is inhibited, the whole nitrification reaction isinhibited.

An experiment was conducted to relate the effectiveness ofN-(n-butyl)thiophosphoric triamide (NBPT) (2.2) and its oxon analogN-(n-butyl)phosphoric triamide (BNPO) (2.11) in controlling ureahydrolysis in soils to their corresponding soil concentrations. Bothcompounds were applied to an acid soil (pH 4.9) and to the same soilthat had been neutralized (pH 1.1) by long-term liming or by the recentapplication of Ca(OH)₂. Hydrolysis of urea applied with the inhibitorswas monitored along with the disappearance of the compounds themselves.Both compounds-controlled urea hydrolysis much more effectively in theneutral soils than in the acid soil. HPLC analysis of soil extractsdemonstrated that both compounds disappeared more rapidly in the acidsoil, and that the compounds disappeared at similar rates for bothneutral soils, indicating that pH governed disappearance rates in thesesoils. Disappearance rates were generally first order for bothcompounds, although NBPT disappeared at an accelerated rate at lowconcentrations, presumably due to its simultaneous conversion to BNPO.The effectiveness of both compounds in controlling urea hydrolysis wasclosely related to the concentrations of BNPO found in the soil. BNPOwas generally maintained at higher concentrations following NBPTapplication than when BNPO was applied directly to soil.

IBDU (2.3), has been shown in experiments to influence soil pH andNitrogen recovery and release patterns. IBDU is used as a slow actingnitrogeneous fertilizer and may be used—instead of conventional urea—asa source of nitrogen in the nutrition of ruminants.

Polyaspartic acid (PASP) (2.4) is a nontoxic, biodegradable,environmentally friendly polymer and is widely used as a fertilizersynergist in agricultural production. In many old orchards and vegetablegardens, highly fertile soil is often accompanied by severe heavy metalcontamination.

Chitosan (CHT) (2.5) is a natural, safe, and cheap product of chitindeacetylation, widely used by several industries because of itsinteresting features. CHT has been proven to stimulate plant growth, toprotect the safety of edible products, and to induce abiotic and bioticstress tolerance in various horticultural commodities. The stimulatingeffect of different enzyme activities to detoxify reactive oxygenspecies suggests the involvement of hydrogen peroxide and nitric oxidein CHT signaling. CHT could also interact with chromatin and directlyaffect gene expression. Recent innovative uses of CHT include synthesisof CHT nanoparticles as a valuable delivery system for fertilizers,herbicides, pesticides, and micronutrients for crop growth promotion bya balanced and sustained nutrition. In addition, CHT nanoparticles cansafely deliver genetic material for plant transformation. This reviewpresents an overview on the status of the use of CHT in plant systems.Attention was given to the research that suggested the use of CHT forsustainable crop productivity.

Mycorrhiza (2.6) refers to mycorrhizal fungi, which are actually livingorganisms. A plant's root system, however big, can never be as extensiveas the network of fungal fibres. The microscopic filaments grow throughthe soil and reach much more nutrients than the roots would. When youtreat your plants with mycorrhiza, you can be sure that they will usethe whole potential of the soil.

Rhizobia (2.6), another organism, are nitrogen-fixing bacterium that arecommon to healthy soil, and are found especially in the root nodules ofleguminous plants. In general, they are gram negative, motile,non-sporulating rods.

Other potential biostimulants which may be added depending on the needsof a particular soil treatments FIG. 2.7 and might include substancesfrom the 4 major classifications of soil additives, a non-exhaustivelisting of subtypes that fall under 1 or more of these 4 majorsubcategories as indicated in Chart 5—The Emerging Landscape of SoilAdditives pg 28 above.

Additional Trace Nutrients (FIG. 1.2 )

Plants need thirteen different minerals from the soil in order to fullydevelop. Six of these nutrients are needed in large quantities. Thesesix essential nutrients are nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, magnesium,sulfur and calcium.

Plants also need small quantities of iron, manganese, zinc, copper,boron and molybdenum, there are known as trace elements because onlytraces are needed by the plant.

Pre-processed Humic Substances (1.3)

While the traditional non-organic biostimulants and microbial soilconditioner components (1.1) and trace nutrients (1.2) are alreadyfairly well understood, it is one of the primary purposes, and theintent of the disclosed protocol to account for humic substances andpromote their benefits and use as an alternative to the previouslydiscussed artificial nitrogen based fertilizers in order to lead to thereduction of GHG released into the atmosphere.

Subsequent FIG. 3 —Humic Products Raw Materials explores and explainsthe four subcategories of considered raw material sources for theseadditives which are processed for the purposes of the invention, andattempts to explain preferred methods of sourcing, processing, and thebenefits derived.

These subcategories can be first broadly described as 1. Seaweed (3.1)2. Composted products (3.3, 3.4, 3.5) 3. Woody products (3.6) and 4.Naturally occurring minerals which are mined. (3.2) Each will bediscussed and described in detail next.

Humic Products Raw Material Source Subtypes (1.3; FIG. 3)

Seaweed (3.1)

Raw material source: Kelp products

Dried kelp will usually contain 1.6 to 3.3% nitrogen, 1 to 2% P₂O₅ and15% to 20% K₂O.

Purpose:

Valued as a growth stimulant because of rich concentrations of traceminerals (over 60), amino acids, vitamins, and growth hormones,including cytokinins, auxins and gibberellins. Available in meal,powder, and liquid forms. Very good for seedlings and transplants.

Process for refinement: drying/crushing/powder or tablet creation (3.7)

Naturally occurring mined minerals (3.2)

Raw material source: Leonardite, oxidized lignite, carbonaceous shales,or humates Humus is the stable, end product of the decomposition of soilorganic matter. It holds water and nutrients, aids soil aggregation, isa source of humic acid and chelates, and contains huge microbialpopulations.

Humates, the boarder term used to describe the raw mined ancient organicsoil, is distinguishable from peat. Unlike peat, humate is thoroughlydecayed or mineralized, so nutrients are instantly available to plants.Humate typically will contain up to 35% humic acids material that helpsdissolve other nutrients for plant utilization. Manures and yard wastecompost also contain humic acids

Purpose:

Potassium humate is the potassium salt of humic acid. It is manufacturedcommercially by alkaline extraction of brown coal (lignite) Leonarditeto be used mainly as a soil conditioner. Depending on the sourcematerial product quality varies.

High quality oxidised lignite (brown coal), usually referred to asleonardite, is the best source material for extraction of largequantities of potassium humate.

Leonardite is a soft brown coal-like deposit usually found inconjunction with deposits of lignite. Leonardite contains a higheroxygen content than lignite and is believed to be an oxidized form oflignite. Chemical studies of the composition of leonardite have revealedthat it is mainly composed of the mixed salts of acid radicals found inhumus, a product of the decay of organic matter which contains bothhumic and nonhumic material. Such acid radicals are collectively termedhumic acids, individual fractions of which are humic acid, ulmic acidand fulvic acid. Oxidized forms of humic acids such as phenyl aceticacid and indol acetic acid have been found with the humic acids in theleonardite.

The less oxidized the coal the less potassium humate extracted. Sourceslow in ash produce the best quality. Less oxidized brown coal contains ahigher proportion of the insoluble humin fraction and along with peatwhich is lower in humic acid content and usually high in ash contentrequires separation by filtration or centrifugation to remove ash,humin.

Process for refinement: mining (a); milling and crushing (b) (3.8, 3.9)

Composted Products (3.10)

Raw material source: Animal manure collection (3.3); stover collection(3.4); organic waste/sewage collection/heavy metals removal (3.5); orcompost (3.6) (commercial or “home-grown”): made from decayed organicmaterials such as straw, corn cobs, food wastes, cocoa bean hulls,poultry litter, grass clippings, leaves, manure widely available fromfarms that has been mixed with bedding material and allowed to compostand age for at least 4-6 months; and/or mushroom compost, used or“spent” compost from mushroom farming which itself is typically somecombination of manures, wheat straw, corn cobs, feathermeal, peanutmeal, peat moss, lime, etc.

Purpose:

Composts improve soil structure and slowly release nutrients to plantroots.

Farm manures usually contain 1% or less each of N, P, and K. Rabbit,sheep and chicken manure are higher in these nutrients. Manure mixedwith urine-soaked bedding will be higher in N. Approximately 20-40% ofthe nitrogen is available to plants the first year after application.Weed problems may occur when the entire compost pile does not reachsufficiently high temperatures. A heavy organic mulch will help smotherweeds.

Mushroom compost—Mushrooms grown in this media use only a small portionof the many nutrients. Nutrient analysis: 2.75-1.5-1.5. Can have highsoluble salt levels and should be fully incorporated and watered priorto planting.

Process for refinement: composting (3.10)

Woody products (3.6)

Types: Forest and other woody plant waste; wood ashes; peat moss; andpeat.

Purpose:

Wood ash analyses shows it tends to run from 1 to 2% phosphorus and from4 to 10% potassium. Hardwood ashes are 45% carbonate equivalent and arehalf as effective as lime for raising soil pH. Softwood ashes are lesseffective than hardwood. Ashes are too fine to improve soil structure.The recommended yearly application rate is 25-50 lbs./1,000 sq. ft. Athigher rates, test soil pH yearly.

Peat is a high in non-humified organic matter that needs to be reducedto produce a high-quality product. The benefit of peat is that it isusually 2-3 times higher in fulvic acid content, which are the lowmolecular weight fractions of humic acid that are high in oxygencontaining functional groups and soluble at a low pH of <1. Fulvic acidshave a higher cation exchange capacity and therefore have a higherchemical interaction with fertilizers and are able to form solublechelates of trace metals.

Peat moss itself is partially composted moss mined from prehistoricnon-renewable bogs. Light and porous, it absorbs 10-20 times its weightin water. Its high surface tension causes it to repel water when it'sdry, so do not use as mulch or top-dressing. Contains little nutrientvalue but has a high nutrient-holding capacity. Acidic (as low as 3.0pH); good for working into azalea and blueberry beds.

Process for refinement: anaerobic combustion which creates bio char(3.11)

Pre-Processed Humic Subtype Discussion (FIG. 1.1 ; 3.16)

This is by no means an exhaustive analysis of natural sources for humicproducts, and it is reasonable to believe that as technology continuesto evolve that additional sources might be discovered, or othercommercially impractical precursors may be utilized in the future.

One point that is important to identify, and will be explored andexplained in greater depth below as the blockchain/multichainarchitecture is discussed is that these materials can be sources frommany different places globally, and that because these raw materials aresourced from nature, there is necessarily variability, such that it isreasonable to expect that for example seaweed sourced at onegeo-location at a particular point in time is unlikely to be identicalto another sample of seaweed sourced from another location, or perhapseven from the same location but different time of year. Much as winerieshave illustrated, one vintage of wine from one year is unlikely to bethe same the following year, there are simply too many variables, suchas weather, that are currently impossible to account for.

The divulged invention and system is meant to address this in thatinherent to the blockchain/multichain architecture are points in timeduring sourcing, harvesting, and production process, sampling andcataloguing occurs.

The intent of this is to allow for greater granularity than is currentlyseen in many industries, specifically the fertilizer industry, and toallow for optimal formulation of a fertilizer biostimulant treatment fora specific target field, effectively designer fertilizer will beenabled. This addresses the current “one size fits all” mentality thatcurrently plagues the commercial farming industry, such that forexample, a farmer may now potentially be using the most optimal seaweedbased fertilizer sourced down to the most optimal seaweed precursor.

Additionally, this measurement and cataloging process serves a whollyseparate but equally valuable purpose, it operates as a validator, andproof of work as to both the final treatment that a farmer applies, andgives up-chain information on all that was done, and what went into thatparticular formulation. This helps to deter concerns of fraud, as it iseasier to perform forensics if there is any question.

Another benefit of having all of this information entered into theblockchain/multichain as to when, where, and what as far as theprecursors utilized is that it builds an enormous database, which inconjunction with the information and outcomes observed in fieldspost-treatment allows for effectively a artificial intelligence typesystem, whereby the predictive treatments for soils and crops becomebetter and better. It is reasonable to believe that on a long enoughtimeline, several breakthroughs will be discovered, much as the medicalcommunity has experienced whereby some obscure plant from the rainforestis later observed to have tremendous benefits to very particulardiseases.

These subcategories of natural sources of humic substances each goesthrough their own distinct preprocess to get the materials workable(1.4), for the next stage of production (1.5; 3.12): the one or moreprecursors will be added to a mixture, such that the desiredhumic/fulvic/ulnic acids can then be mechanically and chemicallyextracted as a liquid concentrate from that mixture (1.5; 3.12)

As such, it is desirable that these raw organic materials bepreconditioned for extraction and distillation by composting, digestion,mechanical grinding or screening processes sufficient to obtain aparticle size of one-fourth inch (¼) or less from the post-processed raworganic material.

Biostimulant Manufacturing (FIG. 1.5; 3.12)

In dry granular production, in most cases, the organic material willneed to be at least thirty percent (30%) by dry weight of the finishedproduct in order to produce enough humic acid molecules to bond to theadded inorganic elements or plant nutrients. In practice, it has beenfound that if the amount of organic material is not adequate or theplant nutrient materials are formulated too high, the excess will createregular soluble salt forms of fertilizer as there will not be enoughavailable humic acid molecules for the inorganic salts to bond with themolecular clusters. At this point, trace mineral elements can be addedin small amounts to one percent (1%) or less of the mix to fulfillspecific needs as required.

Humic Substance Extraction Process (FIG. 1.5; 3.12)

Extraction of humic acid and related materials from carbonaceous rawmaterials has been practiced for years and is accordingly known in theart. Process steps vary, but the goal output is generally a particulatematerial with suboptimal solubility in water such that the humicmaterials may be easily formulated and reincorporated into soil and soiltreatments at a later date.

For most organic materials it has been observed that the requisitehydrolysis can be accomplished by the introduction of an initial acid,other than humic acid, to the mixture, the most commonly utilized andgenerally preferred acids being sulphuric and/or phosphoric acid, toachieve a pH thereof to at least 1.5 but ideally less and more in therange of 1.5 to 0.2.

After mixing the described components, a reaction occurs whereby thereis both a rise in temperature and a release of gas sufficient toincrease air pressure. As such, a base such as anhydrous and/or aquaammonia should then be added to the mixture to then raise the pH above 2again, past the initial pH and generally recommended at or around 6.5pH, the general recommended pH for soil treatments.

In the alternative, where the soil is significantly damaged and requiresgreater treatment and care, this pH can be adjusted to match the idealpurpose of the soil or for what the crops may be expected to require.

Effectively this becomes a mixture whereby it has first been treatedwith an acid, and then a second treatment with a base to readjust the pHback to levels required of the soil to be treated.

Because of the variability of organic matter being utilized, theacid-ammonia ratios must first be determined by actual reaction tests tobe accurate. However, in practice, it is usually the case that aroundthree parts (by weight) of one of the acids to one part of anhydrousammonia will be needed in order to formulate an end product having aneutral pH of 7.

Next, a measured amount of the sulphuric and/or phosphoric acids must beused which will be sufficient to initially drop the pH of the mixture toa level of 1.5 or less. The amount of acid used is generally going to befrom fifteen to thirty percent (15% to 30%) by weight for a granular endproduct, and from five to fifteen percent (5% to 15%) for a slurrymixture end product. The aqua and/or anhydrous ammonia added thereaftermust likewise be in a sufficient amount to raise the pH of the acidifiedmixture to that desired as the finished fertilizer pH. Therefore, thenitrogen present in the organic matter and the inorganic elemental formsof nutrients must be measures, considered, and balanced against thenitrogen which will also be provided by consequence of the ammoniaswhich are introduced later in the process.

It is contemplated that it is beneficial in some circumstances to thenadd the additional process of drying (FIG. 3.13 ) this liquidconcentrate such that a powdered residue is produced. The primarybenefit derived from drying would be a reduction in packaging andshipping costs. The expectation however is that powdered concentratewould only be appropriate when the farmer or end user had the necessaryskill and equipment to add this dry additive to a hydrated fertilizermixture on the farmers end to the disperse the soil treatment to thesame efficacy as if the farmer had received a complete preparedfertilizer from the manufacturing facility. (1.5; 1.6; 1.7; 1.8)

Drying extraction (3.13) is performed in water with the addition ofpotassium hydroxide (KOH), as well as sequestering agents andhydrotropic surfactants that are both sufficient to react, but selected,again in relation to what is necessary to improve the soil which isbeing targeted for treatment. Heat is then used to increase thesolubility of the humic acids which increased the strength of thereaction and its corresponding yield, allowing more potassium humate tobe extracted.

This resulting liquid is then dried, typically by heat lamp or indirectheat in moisture-controlled environments in order to produce theamorphous crystalline like product which can then be added as a granuleto fertilizer when the fertilizer is being reformulated for use. Thepotassium humate granules by way of chemical extraction will lose theirhydrophobic properties and are now soluble as consequence.

Aspects of several such processes are described below to illustratecertain aspects known processes such as is described in variousembodiments herein and is not to intended to be construed as strictlylimiting a practitioner who may reduce a prepared slurry mixture in oneof these described methods, a combination of these methods, or perhapsother methods which may be available.

In an example, production of a granule enriched in humic acid wasundertaken as a multi-step process comprising the blending of rawmaterial and an alkaline mixture in a blend tank; screening of theblended mixture that was made in the blend tank; drying of the liquidderived from screening of the blended mixture, thereby forming a finepowder; and conversion of the fine powder to form granules.

In another example, the selected organic material is prepared and mixedwith measured amounts of the major elements and other plant nutrients asneeded, and the mix placed in a closed vessel. For most organicmaterial, an acid, either sulfuric or phosphoric, is added and mixedtherewith to provide hydrolysis of the constituents via a drastic pHchange. At this stage the mix temperature will be elevated responsive tothe acid reaction, the mix will be under pressure, and will have a mixpH that is usually less than 1.5. This step initiates the breakdown ofthe organic material to humic acid and formation of molecular clustersof plant nutrients around the humic molecules. Next, a basic solution isintroduced into the closed vessel and mixed with the constituents,reacting with the acidic mix to further elevate the temperature andpressure within the vessel, which elevated temperature and pressurecompletes the reaction and molecular bonding, and raises the mix pH to aless acidic pH, usually from 4 to 7 pH. The selection of which pH isdependent upon the type of soil that the humic acid fertilizer isintended for use in. The finished mix is then processed through agranulator to obtain a desired particle size or is pumped into a storagevessel or pit if a slurry is produced.

Returning then to the top level FIG. 1 , this bio stimulate is eitherconsidered complete and ready for packaging (3.15), tagging (1.6; 3.14)and certification (1.7), or it is contemplated in some instances, thetagged bio stimulate will be additionally be first incorporated into afertilizer, and this fertilizer as a whole is what is certified. (1.8)

Where it is the later, the additional raw components contemplated tomanufacture this fertilizer to be certified would include phosphorous,potassium, nitrogen, and other traditional, well-known soilconditioners. (1.9)

To produce a desired end fertilizer typically requires that the relativepercentages of constituents thereof that are commonly known as thefertilizer major elements N—P—K—S (Nitrogen-Phosphate-Potash-Sulfur) arefirst taken into account along with the quantities of the major elementscontributed by the selected acid and base in determining the amounts ofthese major elements to be added to the mix to produce the desiredfinished fertilizer. As has been discussed, because soil health andrestoration is a goal of the described invention, a further step is toalso account for the soil to be treated such that often the result is afinely tuned “designer” fertilizer meant to maximize the potential ofthe treatment and achieve maximum benefit to the farmer or other enduser of the targeted soil.

Prior to mixing of the inorganic elements with the select organicmaterials, the organic materials should and will to have beenpreprocessed by composting, mechanical grinding or other sufficientprocesses such as to obtain a raw material particle size of at leastone-fourth inch (¼) or less.

In dry granular production, in most cases, the organic material willneed to be at least thirty percent (30%) of the mixture by dry weight ofthe finished product in order to produce enough humic acid moleculessufficient to bond to the added inorganic elements or plant nutrients.

At this point, additional trace mineral elements may also be added insmall amounts to one percent (1%) or less of the mix to in order toaddress and fulfill specific needs of the targeted soil as required.

With sufficient processes described to produce either a driedbiostimulant additive for transport and fertilizer formulation or afinal prepared humate enriched fertilizer, we can return to thetop-level diagram, and discuss the necessary taggants (1.6) andcertification (1.10) processes which will be required by the disclosedinvention in order to track, validate, and award greenhouse credits.

Tagging (1.6; 3.14)

Regardless if the resulting extracted and refined powdered or liquidmixture, or if a fertilizer treatment itself is produced, an additionaltaggant (1.6; 3.14) is either determined on the basis of the formulationby sample analysis, or other instances, it may be preferable that anadditional inert taggant will be included in the mixture. Traditionalbar/QR/label are a human convenience. The problem with these identifiershowever is the potential for counterfeiting which may then requireexpensive countermeasures. Because one of the main purposes of thedisclosed invention is to deter fraud in order to bring some stabilityto the carbon credit market, it is important that at multiple stagesmeasurement and validation occur, and desirable to allow forverification to occur, perhaps many years down the road.

In some instances where mined minerals are sourced for the extractedconcentrate humic/fulvic/ulnic acid mixture, there is the potential toconsider the trace minerals which naturally occur at a particular minesite to be unique enough such that these trace minerals themselves mightbe used as an inert natural taggant. (3.14). While trace minerals areinnocuous and common, it is rare to find the same concentrations oftrace minerals from one mining site as to a sample taken from anothermining site, or even among different depths at the same mining site. Inmany instances, these organic tags as prescribed may be sufficient orpreferred as they are inherently natural, biodegradable and safe for theenvironment and there may be unique concentrations such that it ishighly unlikely that the same “tag” is to be found elsewhere.

Alternatively, a method that is currently in wide use in the commercialexplosive, pharmaceutical, and cosmetics industries, are the inclusionof micro taggants. These are normally microscopic artificially createditems that are added to the product during production to prove theorigin and/or manufacturer. Inert solid to liquid phase changingnanoparticles of various types and melting temperatures are now readilyavailable and can be added to synthesized materials to provide a unique,harmless, natural “barcode” which can be measured for years down theroad. In the case of pills or expensive cosmetics, these are inert anddesigned to pass through the body or otherwise be unnoticeable.

As mentioned previously, at its core, the disclosed invention, in orderto successfully lower greenhouse emissions, must account for andinfluence human behavior itself.

As such, at all stages, from procurement, to refinement, to use, so toothen must one be able to measure and hold those at that stageaccountable. In order to address these concerns, the described inventioncontemplates a system which allows for cataloging, measurement, andcomparison across multiple data streams to defeat any attempts todefraud and to ensure compliance.

In the case of the described invention, as to the manufactured productscreated from the humic acids extracted from humate precursors, using ataggant has two important contemplated purposes:

-   -   1. Tracking formulation batches and the precursors that were        used to create them both enables to verify the validity of a        formulated soil treatment, as well as enables greater        granularity in precursor inventory management as to both what is        available, but also what alternatives are preferable if optimal        precursors are in short supply.

Prior to the formulation of a treatment, beginning with the sourcing ofthe precursors, the described system enables one to create effectivelyan entire inventory catalogue of humic precursors, including what wasmined or harvested, the gsp locations of the procurement site, the dateof procurement, and additional granularity specific to precursorsubtype. For example, as was described, mining material is not expectedto be consistent, and thus it is important to distinguish what was minedat a location 50 feet down from what was obtained 250 feet down.

Similarly, if the precursor is seaweed material, it may be beneficial toindicate the subspecies of seaweed harvested, as well as otherindicators important for maritime sourced material, potentially samplingof the waters themselves for trace minerals, weather, water temperature,depth, and the like.

Reaching back to the winery analogy that was discussed above, as withwine quality and taste will depend on the grapes, the primary precursor,and as there are so many variables to account for, it has been difficultif not impossible for wineries to replicate vintages; so too is it anoversimplification to believe that all humic precursors can be swappedand the same results expected or achieved.

As will become clearer in subsequent discussion and examples, anadditional goal of the disclosed invention is to provide a method forcreating and prescribing optimal soil treatments. As such, it is whollyreasonable to believe that a particular “vintage” of humic precursormight be found to work the best on particular initial soil conditions.As such, it is critical to enable a user of the invention to catalog andtrack all materials. Only then, can those precursors be tracked down andincluded. But further than that, it is equally reasonable to believethat should the determined optimal precursor be in short supply or notfinancially feasible, it may be a wholly different precursor subtypethat might work as the next best treatment.

For example, Farmer A elects to enroll his field in the described soiltreatment/greenhouse gas credit program. A sample of the current stateof his field occurs and it is determined that the field requiresprecursor A, precursor B, and a small amount of precursor C to restorefield health, reduce emissions, and for the farmer to receive credit forprogram participation. However, it is found that the optimal precursor Ais a mined humic substance, which was mined 2 years ago in Cuba, N. Mex.at a depth of 100 ft, of which 20 tons were shipped to warehouse X. Thisprecursor A, while known, is depleted and all has been used. Becauseenough trials have been run, it has been determined that the next bestprecursor is precursor D, a seaweed which was harvested and dried lastyear, sourced from the coast of Santa Barbara and stored at warehouse Y,of which 2 tons are available.

This setup uniquely allows for the system to determine the next bestprecursor, which may be disparate in originating time, location, place,and material.

Further, it allows for a unique opportunity of cost-benefit analysiswhereby perhaps the precursor D has 98% efficacy and is a less thanoptimal, but good substitute. In other instances, though, it may be thatany other available precursors are suboptimal. As such, this serves tooperate as a precursor inventory management system, whereby it becomesmore obvious if and when mining operations may be required again inCuba, N. Mex. to obtain this rare precursor A, or if alternatives arereadily or more easily obtained, then effort, money, resources, andnotably additional green house gas output costs associated withrefinement may be avoided entirely.

As a natural consequence of tracking the precursors upstream from when aparticular formulated batch of soil treatment is created, as a naturalconsequence of tracking all of those precursors as well as the point intime that those precursors are utilized and accounted for in theblockchain or multichains, so too then is the genesis of a particularbatch validated.

That is, if the system is tracking that 10 ton batch was created on1/1/2020 which contained precursor A in 3 tons, and precursor B in 5tons then on the blockchain or multichain which accounts for activity onprecursor A and on a separate precursor accounting for precursor B,corresponding transactions will occur indicating use occurring and forwhat purpose. Because so many measurements are occurring, on distinctdata streams, it becomes significantly more difficult, if not whollyimpossible for a fraudulent batch to be created.

This of course, relates back to the underlying architecture ofmultichain-blockchain hybrid architecture whereby at all times there aremultiple copies of ledgers being compared across nodes. With traditionalblockchain, it becomes a task whereby a bad actor must control theconsensus threshold to validate a “bad” transaction. Effectively a badactor must control enough nodes that they vote on their preferredversion of the transaction, and others in the minority then adopt thattransaction.

In multichain architecture, such a proposition becomes significantlymore difficult as the bad actor no longer is attempting to insert theirmodified copy of the ledger, but now is faced with modifying severalseparate streams which are more that likely going to have differentwitness/consensus nodes. Now instead of the bad actor “rail-roading”their ledger they must attempt to railroad several different datapoints, simultaneously, which in of itself broadcasts that a particularnode is attempting to defraud the system.

-   -   2. Subsequent verification of the formulated treatment being        formulated according to prescription and verification of the        treatment being applied to target soil

The inclusion of micro taggants also has consequences downstream ofbatch creation which speak to quality controls and other types ofcounterfeiting and fraud.

Necessarily, because what is being attempted is effectively a highlytuned, designer soil treatment, it becomes important that sampling canbe taken of formulated treatments to audit the factories which areproducing the treatments. If each batch is indicated with a uniqueidentifier, which then points towards a formulation catalogued on afraud resistant data stream, it becomes a simple effort to then samplethat physical product and compare it chemically with the associateddescription.

This operates as an additional security feature against fraudsters aseach batch is known and identifiable.

It also serves to ensure that aside from concerns of fraud, that batchesare being produced according to formulation and if a particular factorycomes under question, appropriate investigation can occur to determinewhere problems lie.

Assuming that there are no issues or concerns with the soil treatmentuntil it is left in the custody of a enrolled farmer, there is yet afinal benefit to be gleaned from these taggants, that is if the taggantsare known and if the taggants can be found in the farm soil, it showsapplication of the product was actually performed and the farmer isfollowing the prescribed protocol.

Certification (1.10; FIG. 4; FIG. 5)

Regardless of the taggant, either naturally present trace minerals orpost processing inert micro markers, the resulting product that shouldbe leaving processing facilities bound for a particular farm and fieldwill be either a certified biostimulant which is added to fertilizermixture at the destination or a complete fertilizer that is prepared atmanaged facilities and itself ready for certification. (1.10)

During the certification process, a finalized sample of the biostimulantis taken (4.1), and laboratory analysis conducted whereby thebiochemical composition of the sample is determined, (4.2), then ananalysis report is generated, and a unique lot number assigned to thebatch of biostimulant/fertilizer. (4.3)

While the described steps themselves are hardly novel and functionallyare themselves little more than a quality control procedure beforeshipment of product, what is notable is when either the soil treatmentor prepared fertilizer certified, the unique lot number creation 4.3 isthe point of genesis of a potential green house gas credit being createdon the underlying blockchain. Additionally, when a batch is created, adata stream relevant and unique to that particular batch is createdwhich will allow for enhanced functionality versus what can beaccomplished efficiently, if at all, on a traditional blockchainarchitecture.

These data streams address much of the scalability problems which havelimited existing blockchain architectures, and enable greatergranularity, address issues of overall scalability, and allow users tostore files on the blockchain in addition to data. Furthermore, thesefiles may be larger than what a single block by itself couldaccommodate. Additionally, individual participants in the blockchain,node operators, are permitted to maintain local working data and fileswhich may not necessarily uploaded to the blockchain but are referencedsuch that they are retrievable.

This is important as the described protocol is something well past whata traditional blockchain structure like bitcoin could accommodate. Thisis because bitcoin itself is a less complicated, more linear process,whereby the blockchain is concerned with only a few data types and a fewlimited activities. Bitcoin's blockchain itself is a record oftransactions concerning bitcoins. The blockchain tracks denominations ofbitcoin, and movement of these denominations among the various addressesor wallets. The node operators which participate in bitcoin, the miners,provide computing power which requires physical upkeep from theoperators, but the computers themselves are designed to run unattended.These computers themselves, per the bitcoin protocol, are largelyconcerned with two tasks, a) attempting to solve complicated mathematicproblems which are self-generated by program, and b) comparing the copyof the blockchain that is locally stored against the copies ofblockchain which exist on other nodes in the network.

In order to incentivize these node operators into running thesecomputation servers, the miners are paid in two ways: 1) whentransactions occur on the network, the person sending an amount ofbitcoin pays an additional amount which is awarded to node operators whoare willing to direct their computing power towards confirming thetransaction, and then spreading and confirming the “true” copy of theledger which indicates the transaction occurred; and 2) potentially whena complicated mathematic problem is solved by their particular node,that node is awarded a newly mined bitcoin, which the miner may keep tospeculate on, or sell on the open market through one of the exchangeswhich traders are purchasing and selling bitcoins.

The proposed protocol is significantly more dynamic and taxing than whattraditional bitcoin blockchain can accommodate, that is, when inoperation, there will be a significant number of node operators,enrollees, who are at various stages of an assigned protocol whichrequires the enrollees themselves to perform physical real world tasks,from obtaining soil samples, to applying the formulated soil treatment,to calculating end of season crop yield. In addition to these physicaltasks, there is corresponding data being collected which account fortime, location, weather, and other variables which are necessary fortrial evaluation to occur.

Concurrently, there are projects which have reached evaluation and thedata is now being calculated and results and similar now to beassociated with projects. Each of these projects were also assigned asoil additive, which has been traced back to precursor information whichwould include where the precursors were obtained, their own lab work,and so on.

Bitcoin's mathematic problems, while retrievable, are largelydisposable, and meant to provide proof-of-work as to the node operators.

In the described protocol however, the operators are providing proof ofwork by actually working, and the chain itself, a record which is meantto be accessed and used. Each unique project in the described protocolwill have a complete biographical record, which as indicated previously,serves to addressing and preventing fraudulent activity.

In addition to allowing all of this biographical data to be stored onthe blockchain record, multichain architecture can also accommodateassets, and transactional information tied to those assets.

As such, when a project completes, is deemed successful, and an enrolleeawarded gas reduction offset credits, those credits will also exist asassets on the blockchain, so while a particular project may have ended,the results of it, these credits, will still be trackable, and forevertied to the original biographical data which led to the credit'sgenesis.

In order to better understand how this is accomplished, we will describethe multichain architecture and how a large variety of information anddata can be stored on a large ordinately ordered chain but still quicklymade assessable.

FIG. 5 is an illustration which explains the basic architecture ofmultichain. Beginning with the obvious, 5.1 represents the blockchainitself. A blockchain itself comprises a multitude of individual datablocks (5.3; 5.4) which are of a fixed size, and a particular order. Asnew information is appended to the blockchain, new blocks are createdand appended to the end, and as a natural course, over time theblockchain as a whole will become significant in terms of file size andstorage requirements.

The reason for this parsing is that one of the fundamental purposes ofblockchain is that data contained within it is continuously compared toother participants on the blockchain in order to facilitate consensus.Consensus is pretty much as one would think, whereby as comparisonsoccur, any sort of irregularities begin to be discovered, and theblockchain seeks to adopt the copy of a particular block that is foundthe most often. While there are ways to potentially defraud bitcoin, itis far more difficult and expensive to do as it requires inserting ablock with the fraudulent data, and then the capacity to confirm this isthe “true” block from adjacent nodes. Instead of bad data being simplyoverwritten on a master copy on a single computer, a bad actor now hasto make it appear across numerous copies of the blockchain spread acrossnumerous nodes at the same time, in significant numbers, that the badcopy of data is seen to be the consensus determined good copy. Notimpossible, but the larger the network, the cost scales to the point ofbeing potentially impractical as the bad actor must defeat an increasingnumber of copies of the blockchain that would vote against the badactors bad data.

In Bitcoin's blockchain, as discussed, the data within is informationall of an ordinate type itself, the data itself is a massive ledgerwhich tracks bitcoin creation and movement among addresses as thebitcoin is exchanged. As such, early blocks will have transactions thatoccurred in time before more recent blocks. The information itself isall of one data type as well, that is, it is all transaction records. Assuch, each individual block in bitcoin's blockchain looks relatively thesame in terms of contents. Suffice to say, for the purposes of bitcointype blockchain, the blockchain is the database, and it isn'tparticularly dynamic or scalable.

As such, one of the drawbacks in bitcoin's architecture is that, as timepasses, and more data is contained on the blockchain, the blockchainitself becomes massive, and node operators face issues with navigatethese files when they only desire very particular information.

In multichain architecture, by design, indexing is enabled. What thismeans is that when a particular batch is created, an indexing identifiercan be created unique to that batch, and relevant data can be easilyassociated despite being at separate locations along the blockchain.

Multichain architecture begins with the same basic components, that isthere is a master blockchain 5.1 also in multichain, and this blockchainis also made of blocks 5.2 which are ordinately arranged 5.3; 5.4 withnew blocks being appended to the end of this blockchain. 5.1

However, the design of the individual blocks 5.2 in multichainsignificantly differs, such that unique datastreams 5.12; 5.13 can becreated which are able to reference individual blocks and allow forenhanced functions.

Notably, within each individual block 5.2 in addition to the recordswithin 5.5; 5.6 is the inclusion of a mining signature 5.7. Thissignature itself, indicates the individual blocks relative position inthe chain, and biographical data as to this block's genesis, but unliketraditional blockchain also identifies the records contained within andwhere each record resides within the space of the allotted block. Thereason for this is the blocks themselves are subdivided based upon thecontents. Whereas traditional blockchain will just be a series oftransactions until the blocksize is exhausted, multichain allows for avariety of data to exist on the blockchain. Raw data might be enteredthe same way it enters traditional blockchain, but multichaincontemplates and is intending to allow and improve on other data typesbeing entered as records and blocks into the master blockchain.

That is to say, in a hypothetical block 5.2, the records within mightconstitute one record 5.5 which simply contains the raw native dataexpected to be entered into the blockchain, but the same block mightthen also containing a record 5.6 which is a picture, audio, proprietaryfile (excel, word, PowerPoint, etc.), video, or otherwise.

This is enhanced further in that a file that may be too large to becontained in a single block may be subdivided and then spread across asmany individual blocks are needed to store the file to the blockchain,with the mining signatures and records data referencing the subsequentblocks needed to store the file.

Where the two models diverge even further is that multichain canaccommodate file shards 5.8; 5.9; 5.10.

A file shard is a file which isn't stored on the blockchain 5.11, butinstead a hash of that shard is stored in a record as a filename,indicating where that file may be retrieved, and sufficient biographicaldata to confirm the contents of the file which is retrieved.

The effect of this is it enables scalability far past what thetraditional blockchain model can accommodate. Moreover, it is anacknowledgement that in many, if not early all databases, there arefiles which are less critical to other users wishing to retrieveinformation. For example, there may be iterative files, redundantbackups, cache files, working files and the like which are notreasonably going to be accessed often, if ever, and as such, it would beinefficient to have these files entered as blocks in the masterblockchain which would necessitate all participants not being requiredto download this portion of the blockchain and occasionally verify andparticipate in consensus as to their contents. To do so would morelikely than not, be a waste of the resources of the greater populationof participants, particularly as more and more of this rarely accesseddata is entered into the blockchain for storage.

The next significant deviation from traditional blockchain architectureis that multichain allows for the creation of data streams, a componentwhereby if the master blockchain is the “hard drive”, streams act asworking directories on that hard drive.

On a physical hard drive, files are written to the drive according towhere they will fit, and where there either is no data, or it has beenindicated that old data is considered deleted and may be over written.While the file explorer on your computer will show files groupedtogether, this is only for the convenience of the user, on the harddrive itself, rarely will a folders contents all be located on thephysical device together.

A data stream is similar to this convenient visualization in that thedata within is likely to be spread across the blockchain and located atdifferent blocks, and as we have explained with sharding capabilities,some files may even reside locally on the user's computer.

Traditional blockchain does not have this sort of indexing, so a userintending to work with data stored across the blockchain must downloadthe entire chain, and then search the chain to locate data relevant totheir purposes. While there are blockchain explorers which have beendeveloped to facilitate this process, there is currently nothing that isbuilt into the initial blocks themselves the way blocks are created onmultichain variant of blockchain.

This variety of accepted data format, and quick access is vital to thedescribed protocol as because the data entered in the describedblockchain is entered on the basis of real world processes andmeasurements, which simply due to the temporal requirements to effectimproved biochemical composition of a project soil, may be entered intothe master blockchain after a significant amount of time has passed, andthus, blocks are likely to be spread far distances down the blockchainwhen program evaluation for a particular project occurs.

How a data stream works in practice can be thought as such, as each nodeoperator in the system is carrying out certain real-world tasks, thosetasks are being accounted for and corresponding data and files is beingcreated. Potentially there is also already preexisting data on theblockchain which a particular project will reference. There is also theissue of the iterative files, redundant backups, cache files, workingfiles mentioned previously. When a node operator begins a new project, adata stream is created which indicates that it is the “working space”for that particular project. The stream itself doesn't contain the filesor data, as indicated 5.12; 5.13, but instead is database of indexaddresses which indicate where the relevant files or data is to befound. As one would anticipate by FIG. 5 and the discussion thus far,this means that one index address in the stream may be pointing to ablock which contains data 5.14, one index may be pointing to anotherblock some distance away that is a fragment of a larger file that hasbeen split across several blocks 5.15; 5.16, and potentially anotherindex may be pointing towards a block which itself contains file shardswhich redirect to the off-chain files and where they may be retrieved5.8; 5.9; 5.10.

As new data related to the project is created, the stream can append toindicate this new data and where it may be located. More interesting,and of particular utility is once created, a stream itself may then beshared. This is substantial as the described protocol covers such a widevariety of disciplines, many of which may be performing work far fromwhere a parcel of soil is undergoing a prescribed soil treatment.

As such, once a project is potentially concluding and results are beingevaluated, it becomes a much simpler task for a distant node operator topull up a data stream and by the indexes contained within be led to thespecific files they would need to perform their own tasks required toevaluate what sort of green house gas savings was achieved. Once aprogram participant enters a post project evaluation, all of this datais already indexed on the blockchain, expediting evaluation by witnessnodes who themselves are likely to be less concerned with some of theday to day data and may simply wish to prioritize critical files. It isbecause of this indexing that these witnesses are able to quickly jumpalong the blockchain and pull up the relevant portions of chainnecessary for the witness nodes to perform whatever evaluation or tasksthat they wish to conduct.

Thus, by using streams a later in time observer is being first presentedwith the required and relevant data and files, and not a massive numberof files which aren't going to generally be accessed by others. Thatsaid, with the shard capabilities allowed by multichain, should thislater in time observer wish to elect to do more of a forensicinvestigation of what occurred, there is a means for them to see theseless critical data files indicated as shards and request that thesefiles be made available for review.

Streams also allow a particular block to be referred to by a number ofstreams simultaneously. This becomes important for the describedprotocol because of the variety of participants in the describedprotocol and their relatedness.

It is contemplated that in one embodiment of the described protocol, adata stream may be created and assigned to a particular mining sitewhich is physically excavating humic substances. Another data streamwould be created for a participant whose roll is harvesting the seaweedproducts destined for additives. As both of these participants carry outtheir duties, the mining stream is adding indexes which refer to the gpslocation of the mine, when the mining operation occurred, the depth atwhich the humate was mined, and the amount mined. Similarly, for theseaweed harvester, they would be creating data which describes theparticular species, where, when, quantity and so on.

Quite separate from both of these operations would be an operatorresponsible for refining these materials. This refiner would have accessto both of these streams and be able to indicate when the shipment ofraw materials was received, confirming quantity, and other similarmetrics, but then this refiner is likely to create data of their ownwhich might define lab analysis indicative of quality, how theprecursors were refined, and other information important to the refiner,but of little importance to the miner and the harvester participants.The data that this refiner creates nevertheless can be indexed by thestream, and the information easily located by other node operators.

The same logic and process would then similarly apply to the datacreated by the agronomist, the farmer who applies the biostimulantprescribed by the agronomist, project evaluators, and so on whereby somedata is created, and additional indexes created in the stream indicatedwhere this data might be found.

This allows for a large number of participants to have access to aparticular project, and do additional work with the data, but work whichis of a non-destructive nature, the data which is indexed within datastreams is not modified by subsequent participants, but these subsequentparticipants can access the data to do their own functions and thenindicate what they did with the data and add that information to thedata stream.

Effectively, the multi-stream architecture allows for a working spacewhich suits the needs of a particular node operator to be created andexist alongside the blockchain whereby if anyone wanted to at any timethey could jump to and view that projects critical data and then, ifthey wanted to, request shards such that they could biographicallyobserve everything that has happened on a particular project.

Moreover, this flexibility allows for the creation of streams forparticular operations occurring in the system.

For example, per FIG. 5 , we see that there are two sub-databasesindicated, 5.12, and 5.13. Potentially, Stream 1, 5.12, is created forthe same hypothetical humate mining operation which is occurring inCuba, N. Mex. All the biographical information as to this miningoperation is contained in 5.12 and nothing more. Stream 2, 5.13 howeverhas been created for a particular land parcel which is set to undergorestorative efforts. Stream 2 can index data being created by theefforts of Stream 1, that is, the agronomist entering data indexed byStream 2 may wish to indicate that one of the components of theformulation created for Stream 2 efforts was humate mined by the effortsof Stream 1. As such, a block created on the blockchain by Stream 1 canbe simply referenced by Steam 2 as being a source component.Recursively, an observer reviewing data indexed under Stream 2 can tracethat Stream 1 played a role and observe that if they elect to do so,however as hinted at, this at least initially allows those creatingstreams to elect on and set the granularity of the data containedwithin.

Finally, it must also be addressed and explained that in addition togrouping indexes as data streams, there is also the capability withinmultichain to indicate indexed blocks as being assets instead of data,files, or shards.

This functionality is what allows digital assets to be created and thentracked on the multichain's master blockchain.

In bitcoin's blockchain environment, as described, occasionally a nodeoperator is rewarded with a bitcoin when their node solves a mathematicproblem posited by the bitcoin protocol. Bitcoins themselves act ascurrency within the bitcoin blockchain, so when one is created, thebitcoin blockchain begins to track this bitcoin as it is traded withinthe system.

In the described protocol, instead of a greenhouse gas offset beingcreated by the blockchain or multichain, it has been created through thereal-world actions of the node operators and participants. While theseoffset credits are also exchanged like an asset and tracked within thesystem, they are more similar to a coupon than currency. That is to say,eventually an offset credit will be redeemed against a partiescommercial activity and be considered exhausted.

As such, these offsets are anticipated to have a finite “lifetime”whereas bitcoin at its outset was created with a predetermined maximumnumber of bitcoins, 21 million. Bitcoins like an actual coin areintended to last until they are inadvertently lost.

The disclosed protocol doesn't anticipate any sort of finite limit tothe number of offset credits the system can create, and by design, thesystem needs to allow for redemption and creation of new offset creditsto be awarded when expectations have been satisfied.

As such, it is possible within blockchain or multichain for thoseevaluating field trials that occurred under a datastream 5.12 to declarethat expectations were met and the program enrollee due an award ofgreenhouse gas credit offsets. These greenhouse gas credit offsets wouldbe awarded as an asset 5.13 but the information within this asset wouldstill behave somewhat like a datastream. That is the indexes containedwithin the asset 5.13 would index a block which would represent thegreen house gas offset credits 5.17. Subsequent indexes within the assetwould be able to refer to the project that led to the award of thecredit itself 5.18, indexes which would indicate subsequent trading ofthe offset credits 5.19, and other data which would be meaningful to asubsequent purchaser or auditor of the gas offset.

Again, this ability to create steams or assets with only what would beimmediately relevant, and references to allow forensics is worthemphasizing as a trader purchasing a gas offset credit is going to beimmediately far less concerned with issues such as where the humatewhich treated the field which led to the creation of the offset and moreconcerned with chain of title and validity issues.

As mentioned, eventually a purchaser will purchase this asset 5.13 andapply it, exhausting the value of the credits it represents. Onredemption, the block(s) representative of the credit(s) themselves canbe either indicated as exhausted, or the blocks sent to a burner addressat which point the block is broadcast burned to the blockchain network,and the block effectively inaccessible. The blockchain will know that ablock occurred, and the chain is not broken, merely the block now existsin a ghostlike state where it cannot be referred to. That said, theother indexes within the asset and the blocks they reference are notdestroyed, and a complete history of everything that led to the creationof a particular carbon offset, from the location of the field, theinitial state of the soil, the final state, the prescription the fieldreceived, the amount of credits that were generated, and the partiesthey were exchanged by and through until application in an immutablebiographical format on the blockhain or multichain.

It has been considered that this parsing and indexing of files mightlead to one embodiment of the invention whereby nodes themselves areable to scale involvement, participation, and trust levels.

As mentioned above, in blockchain, and a majority of multichain models,all node operators must download the entire blockchain in order toparticipate as a node operator. It has also been indicated that thelonger a blockchain runs and appends, the blockchain itself naturallybecomes of such size that the necessary computing and data storagerequirements become an issue.

As such, it may be of benefit to enable nodes to perform particular,enhanced functions at a necessary sacrifice of other functions. Forinstance, it may become necessary or desirable to allow some nodes to bedesignated archival nodes which primary purpose is to store earlierblocks of the blockchain and to be less involved with data entry orblock creation. Other nodes may on the other hand rarely use archivedblocks and may be designed to prioritize or perhaps only witness andverify blocks more recently created.

In such an embodiment, it may be able to carry this design further suchthat node operators might create or access a stream and only therelevant blocks themselves are downloaded locally whereas otherarchived, unassessed blocks are indicated, but instead of data, thelocal machine creates placeholders that acknowledge the location andsize of these blocks without the need of downloading the data itself. Ofcourse, should the node operator later wish to access these placeholderblocks, they would need to them download copies of these missing butverified blocks to the local machine for viewing.

This would allow those concerned with specific projects to only downloadthe blocks or shards flagged by the datastream index significantlylowering the local infrastructure and computing costs. In same wayplaceholders are created on the local machine indicating missingcontent, it may also be desirable to have what this limited nodeoperator is doing to the rest of the multichain network.

The unique data stream in this limited node environment could is updatedand appended to, indicating new files and information destined forsubmittal to the blockchain as the limited node operator proceedsthrough their tasks. Disinterested parties on the blockchain would onlybe informed that a new project has been created, where the relevantfiles for that project would be found on the blockchain, but not need tonecessarily update the local copies of the blockchain on thedisinterested operator's computers. In the same way, that blocks couldbe ghosted on a limited operator's node, it would be possible fordisinterested operators to indicate that new blocks were available to beretrieved but the disinterested operator could at least control whenthese ghosted blocks were retrieved.

This would allow certain operators to limit the demands on their localmachines, but of course, the multichain network would need to reconcilethis in some way. Likely nodes that operated in such a capacity wouldneed to be deemed less trusted on the network in terms of when blocksare compared against nodes, as there would be some nodes that do nothave complete copies of the blockchain. Similarly, other nodes whichhave entire copies of the blockchain might be deemed to be oracles orarbiters, whereby the blocks retrieved from these nodes would beslightly more trusted against limited node blocks, or the limited nodeblocks submitted to the network might require additional vetting andassurances versus blocks entered by these oracle nodes.

In such an embodiment, this sort of node participant designation designwould more readily accommodate the sort of disparate computing powerdifferent operators are likely to have. The hypothetical farmer who ismerely intending to have information entered reflecting what activitieshe has conducted is unlikely to be interested in investing insignificant computing resources. However other operators may have theresources to accommodate the increasing size of the blockchain but wishto specialize some of their computing resources on the network towardsarchival and data verification but free up other computing resources ondifferent machines for other tasks.

In the same way that data streams and multichain architecture providemore flexibility on a blockchain database model, this variety of nodeoperators may be desirable or necessary to address costs and scalingissues.

So far we have described how greenhouse gas emissions may be reduced,and soil health improved, by way of a farmer applying prescribed soiltreatments to their fields, and we have described how these treatmentsare created, that is samples of soil are submitted and drawing uponvarious described sources for soil nutrients, designer fertilizers maybe created. We have also discussed the need for tracking of massiveamounts of data, and have provided a network architecture which canaccommodate the requirements of such a system while also describing theneed for incentivizing participation in gas reduction efforts as well asmethods to ensure validity and thus long term value of awarded carboncredits.

Now, the discussion can shift towards how a hypothetical farmer wouldenroll in such an award system, and we will step through the variousprocesses this farmer would encounter and what occurs before credits areawarded and the rationale behind these processes. This enrollment,evaluation, enrollment, and eventually credit retirement system iscollectively deemed the Life Cycle Approach.

LCA Participant Enrollment Process (FIG. 1.11; FIG. 6)

In order for a person to generate and receive a verified green housecarbon offset credit under the described system they must enroll as aparticipant such that they can be bound to certain expectations andrequirements and have their performance tracked, recorded, andevaluated.

A person does not have to register as a participant if their onlyinterest is in purchasing credits that have generate by the describedsystem and only wishes to consume the credits or perhaps speculate onthe credits and trade them as they would trade other more traditionallyknown and understood commodities, but in order for a credit to becreated on the system a target field must be measured as to its initialstate, and what the state is on purported completion of a soil treatmentregiment in order to verify that the soil treatment protocol wasfollowed and that computation would confirm that the new status of thefield would according to computer models produce less green house gases,and thus the participant now eligible for payment, in this case a offsetcredit to be used or sold.

That said, the preferred and prescribed method for enrollment can bestated as such: When a farmer elects to participate in the LCA programFIG. 6.1 , they would first need to submit which fields they would wantto enroll in the program. The first threshold that an enrollee will needto meet is the simple matter of square footage and time that they arewilling to take direction as to how a particular parcel is to berehabilitated. 6.2

This is a simple, but necessary gatekeeping measure as the computermodels which determine the current output a field is expressing, and thetotal savings in greenhouse gas output that can be estimated all requirethe area of the field in order to extrapolate what restorative measuresare likely to lead to estimated reduction in volumetric tonnage ofemissions.

Hand in hand with the volume would be a subjective measurement, but as asimple matter because the enrollee is subscribing to the program andexpected to take direction, so too are they effectively sharing in themanagement of this parcel for a particular timeframe. As one can expect,if the enrollee is not willing to share or take direction for asufficient time-frame and much of the overall reductions require theoverall state of the health of the soil to shift, if the enrollee cannotenroll a property for a sufficient amount of time, it will be unclear,and maybe even unknowable if any reduction in output occurred.

Suffice it to say, there is a requisite baseline of both size ofproperty, and length of enrollment required in order for observable andthus verified results to be achieved. Fortunately for an enrollee, andone practicing the invention, this is a simple matter of inputting thesquare footage and commitment, and then seeing if the models predict arewardable reduction is likely to occur. Suffice it to say, if a plot isnot large enough, or an enrollee only willing to commit to short timeframes, it is unlikely that they will be recruited or offered theopportunity to proceed to the next steps towards project enrollment.

The next steps to occur will that technician determined the physicalgeo-location coordinates of the field 6.3, and a physical sampling ofthe field soil is procured for analysis 6.7.

In some instances, this technician may be employed by the centralauthority that acts as system operator and overseer of the describeprotocol, but there may be instances in which a trusted 3^(rd) partyneutral takes these measurements on behalf of the system.

In either case, the physical location of the field 6.3 is determined andcatalogued and is used to help identify and index the project. Asdescribed previously, in the implemented version of the invention,effectively at all times there are various projects around the globe atvarious states of progress. Theoretically on a long enough timeline,some of this land may change ownership or be rehabilitated in differentways. As such, the easiest way to identify and index projects is firstby time, and then by physically determined and mappable location. Thisalso serves the additional purpose as being a check and verification ofthe plot size of the parcel at issue.

Next, and of clear importance is the sampling of the initial “starting”state of the soil itself (6.7; 7.1). This will be determinative as towhat soil treatments can be prescribed to achieve particular results.This also acts as a gatekeeper in of itself as it is wholly possiblethat an enrollee's soil is already in a healthy state, or that if thesoil is particularly unhealthy, or would require specific and rareamendments, the proffered parcel may not qualify for enrollment (7.2)

Further, if the soil is at a particular state of unhealthiness, thiswill necessarily weight the other requirements such as length of time oftreatment, or what treatments and concentrations might be considered.

It is contemplated and appreciated that there may be a variety ofinitial sampling protocols depending on the composition of the field inquestion. In some instances, it may be sufficient to take a sampling,and simply indicate the location and depth the sample was taken at.Reasonably though, in other instances, in order to ensure a fieldscomposition or to better account for variability, it may be necessary totake multiple samples from multiple core depths from multiple positionsabout the field. While topsoil typically only constitutes the top 5 to10 inches of soil, because a rather complex natural biochemical shift inthe composition of the field is being attempted, there may be factors toconsider that extend past a depth of 10 inches. Similarly, there islikely that many fields may have been purposed for different processes,and as such, the initial starting state of the soil in one position ofthe field may not necessarily be reflected in another position,particularly when large areas are under scrutiny.

A final consideration, one that may or not be elective, but neverthelesscontemplated is an assessment of both what crops the field in questionhas previously been producing, but also and perhaps more determinativeas to if the enrollee will continue towards enrolling the parcel inquestion into the LCA program is what crops the field will be producinggoing forward. (6.6)

Understandably, different crops will have different nutrition and waterdemands. Further, different crops will also have their own effects inkind as to the soil biodiversity and chemistry. As such, it isconsidered and reasonable that in addition to requiring a enrollee tocommit to amend the fertilizer that they apply to a particular parcel,in some embodiments there may be additional requirements as to what theenrollee produces on a particular parcel while it is enrolled in thecontemplated gas credit program. This may be as specific as requiring anenrollee to grow specifically defined crops, or it may be a gatekeeperquestion which helps to define the fertilizer formulation that iscreated for the enrollee, or there may simply just be a moratorium as tocrops which may be counterproductive to the greater goals of loweringemissions and improving soil health.

All of this information is submitted (6.4) and reviewed, and if theenrollee meets the threshold requirements the parcel is consideredenrolled (6.5) at which time, enough identifying information isavailable such that a unique index marker can be created for theparticular project and genesis occurs on the main blockchain.

From this point forward, until evaluation, this project will have eitherdata located directly on the blockchain itself, or a defined data streamwithin the multi-stream architecture, and all subsequent data untilevaluation can be clustered on the basis of this unique index marker. Wewill next step through the data collected and processes applied untilthis project is closed out, but a critical point to make and keep inmind is that by creating a unique data stream for each individualproject, and then clustering all relevant data towards that portion ofthe blockchain, both operator, enrollee, and other interested 3^(rd)parties will be able to now locate this project on the blockchain andthen add, manipulate, delete, the data with far less effort than thetraditional blockchain model.

In traditional blockchain, as data enters the blockchain, it continuallyappends to the end of the blockchain, in the order that data isreceived. When no further data is expected, and the blockchain is moreof a traditional ledger, that is, an entry is made to create a permanentrecord, this sequential data entry works fine.

That said, the disclosed invention, while heavily geared towardscataloging massive amounts of data, contemplates in some embodiments theevolving and modifying the standard typical blockchain model and allowsfor the creation of a master index which points towards all projects andother defined data clusters towards partitions for each project that areintentionally larger in storage size than the project reasonably shouldrequire. Then, as new data enters the chain that relevant to aparticular project, that data can be stored next to what is mostrelevant. Eventually when a project is evaluated and closed out, whatwill then occur is a “clean-up” pass whereby any empty partition isreleased, and further, much of the data that had been stored on thatcluster may also be discarded (redundant copies, working data files,dicta, buffers) and only vital, cleaned up data retained. It is thisclean data that can then be deemed “final” or “master” copies, and aimmutable copy of this data then entered into the blockchain.

The effect of such a design is that the blockchain works more similar toa distributed file system like Dropbox, whereby different users canlimit what they download if they are only concerned with specific files.As indicated by this discussion, traditional blockchain would not allowa user to operate this way, and they would be expected to download theentire blockchain and then skip around the chain to find the data whichthey require for computations. Further, while this allows particularusers to more effectively work, it also allows other users on theblockchain system to not be forced to update their versions of theblockchain if the cluster that is being worked on by some is disparatefrom them and the work that they are doing. Effectively, what thisdesign allows is for each project to have its own “working space” whichis then cleaned up on project closure and a smaller, cleaned up, andvalidated version of the data uploaded to the blockchain indicated as amaster record and for all to work with.

The thought behind all of this being that while the decentralization oftraditional blockchain has value, there is a need for greatergranularity that what it allows for. Further, unlike traditionalblockchain, the contemplated process has in theory many differentprojects running simultaneously, and the final results of those projectsmay not be known for some time, which would spread data all over aordinate blockchain, making manipulations significantly more difficult.

Finally, there must also be a concession that the final records ofprojects are most likely to be of interest to all participants, but theyare less concerned about the day to day data that a particular enrolleemight be cataloguing prior to project evaluation. Like with any officethat does collaborative projects, it is really only the final draft thatothers in the office will be interested in, and previous versions,drafts, and the like are not valuable enough to warrant recording to themaster blockchain.

With those benefits of this improved design explained, let us now speakto the process that an enrollee will cycle through after a particularparcel has been enrolled into a project.

LCA Project Utilization (1.12; FIG. 7)

So far it has been discussed the greater problems to be addressed,greenhouse gas emissions and poor soil health, and it has been describeda method for procuring humic precursors and that by applying aformulated soil treatment or fertilizer, an observable reduction ingreenhouse gas emissions occurs. We have discussed a method forenrolling participants into an LCA program that would grant greenhouseemission credits for successful rehabilitation projects that theyparticipate in and discussed the data that would be initially collectedand the value of that data. We have also discussed, in part, how and whyone would choose to apply a modified multi-chain blockchain architectureover traditional blockchain design.

Now, with the necessary components described we can finally describe howthese methods can be brought together and function to award a farmer orenrollee a greenhouse emission credit when the enrollee follows theprotocol that has been determined and assigned to their unique project.

As described above, the LCA Protocol provides for a specific formulationto be prescribed to farmers field, one that will optimize and balancesoil health to crop yield to relative GHG output reduction and/or waterquality improvement and/or water use reduction.

That said, in tandem with the enrollee submitting their parcel forproject consideration a soil sample(s) is either taken or received (6.7;7.1)

As was discussed, a biochemical soil analysis is performed to determinethe initial make-up of the applicant's soil (7.2) and an initialnutrient content and organic matter report produced (7.3).

This initial report as one would reasonable guess is destined for thedata stream allocated for the project as it will need to be retrievableboth when a soil amendment formulation is determined, other restorativeprotocols considered, and to compare with subsequent measurements to seeif the project is tracking correctly, indicating the enrollee'scompliance, and then a final comparison at the final evaluation of theproject to see if there was success in rehabilitating the field, andthen recursively determining the greenhouse gas reduction that occurredas a consequence of a successful project.

Predictably and as has been described, the next step is the initialreview of this soil and soil report, and a determination by a agronomistand a custom prescription for soil treatment which applies the humicsubstances described, other known biostimulants, nutrients, andfertilizer is determined, along with a recommended protocol for applyingthis soil amendment, for a predetermined time-frame. (7.4).

Assuming that the enrollee has accepted the terms of the project theyhave been enrolled in, it would be expected that they then procure thisformulation, either by purchasing it directly (7.5) from the LCA ProjectConsortium or from an affiliated 3^(rd) party that is able to recordpurchases, track shipments, (7.6) and accurately have this informationentered into either the data stream for the particular project (7.7), adata stream which is purposed specifically for in progress projectformulation, purchase, and shipping information, or most likely acombination of the two.

The benefits of this modified multichain architecture is easilyunderstood and appreciated when it is considered that the tracking ofall of these shipments is unlikely to be data that is of high importanceto most of the other users and participants on the system. As such, itmakes sense to allow the various shippers to have their data protectedby the blockchain architecture but to also give them the flexibility tostructure their data and manipulate it in ways that are eitherimpractical or impossible on a traditional blockchain. When a particularproject evaluates and is determined to be successful, just as there is acleanup which occurs on that projects particular datastream, so to willthere be an opportunity to clear up any allocations or data that isstored on the shipping datastream. This analogy carries over to anyagronomist's data streams, purchase orders, precursor mining andrefinement streams, and so on.

Returning to the enrollee then, after procuring the soil treatment,necessarily the enrollee must apply it their field (7.8) according tothe agronomist's directions. Potentially many treatments may be a matterof a single application, but it must also be considered that sometreatments may take several treatments over a much larger time frame.

In situations where multiple applications must occur, it is reasonable,and the disclosed architecture would allow for subsequent soil sampleprocurement, analysis, and adjustment in soil amendments, and naturallyall of this additional data could be clustered in the same project datastream. Effectively, an iterative process is enabled whereby thoseprojects with longer time frames, and increased evaluations, are likelyto yield better results.

That said, because all of this data is being stored on the blockchainand is accessible, once enough time and projects have occurred, thesystem has innate rudimentary artificial intelligence functions that canbe capitalized on.

For example, once enough data collection has occurred, and previousprojects have provided positive results that support applying particularformulations to particular soil states, much of the need for “tuning”prescriptions will dissipate. In theory, if another project field issubmitted for consideration, and the state of that field is inconditions similar to what has been encountered before, there will be acontinuously growing historical record to indicate what works and whatdoes not.

Additional embodiments of this project utilization process have beenconsidered whereby the specified project data stream would also includeinformation received from the cpu of the enrollee's tractor or otherfield machinery (7.9), tracking of the enrollee's water usage (7.10),and potentially even account for temperature, weather conditions, orother factors that may have or are simply believed to have relevance orimportance to commercial farming and soil health.

Project Evaluation (1.13; FIG. 8; FIG. 9)

At this point it is understood that a hypothetical enrollee hassubmitted their field for project acceptance, the field was evaluatedand approved, a agronomist has formulated a protocol that covers whatsoil amendments to add to the field, and what other measures are to betaken, and that the enrollee is to follow this protocol until expirationand evaluation. If the project was a success, the project data stream isclosed out, a master copy recorded on the blockchain, and most importantof all to the enrollee, they receive their reward, a green house gasoffset credit to be eventually used, saved, or sold.

FIG. 8 covers the data that has been collected, and what final dataneeds to still be collected and for what purpose. In FIG. 9 we willdiscuss the actual arithmetic and discuss the thresholds the enrolleeneeds to meet and why before a credit is awarded and the particularproject data stream closed.

As the LCA at this point in the project already has a record of theinitial baseline samples of soil health, and other metrics such asweather, water use, crop yield, and the like has been recorded as theproject has progressed it ultimately becomes a matter of collecting asample of the current state of the soil (8.1) to compare with theinitial state listed in the data stream record.

It would be prudent, and because the data stream allows for data thatmay be of nominal benefit to nevertheless follow the same protocol thatwas followed in collecting the first soil sample, if not elevatedprotocols ensuring custody and validity as this comparison will be theone that determines payout. As such, it is contemplated and beneficialto also record the location data of these samples (8.1) in the eventthere is any question and subsequent interactions are required to proveor disprove results.

This soil would be analyzed (8.4) according to the same protocol appliedto the first sample to ensure accurate comparison and measured for soilorganic matter content, density, nutritional content, and biodiversity.(8.5)

This post project sample is then compared against the recorded initialstate and both compared against the soil health and composition whichwas set as the target by the agronomist. Additional metrics such as cropyield and quality (8.2) might also be referenced in determining ifenrollee did, in fact follow protocol, and whether the desired changesand improvements were achieved.

The effect of this physical sampling and evaluation is as such, itprovides verification of the enrollee's work, or to borrow a term fromblockchain, this acts as a proof of work mechanism. Referring back tothe blockchain/multichain at work we now have collected data whichconsiders where this field exists down to GPS coordinates, we haveinitial samples and evaluation of the field soil, we have a recommendedsoil treatment created for these conditions, we have catalogued thecreation of this soil treatment all the way from the raw materials, totheir refinement, to the fertilizer creation, we have shipping andtracking information, and a final sample of the soil. We additionallymay have much more data which covers what was grown, the yield of thosecrops, weather, and irrigation information. All of this data collectionhowever has occurred longitudinally, by various agents, but this dataitself, is stored on a distributed file structure. Cumulatively, thiscreates an enormous obstacle for a would be bad actor to overcome, as itis much more complicated to create fraudulent entries when there are somany copies of the data, on disparate computers, and all of the data fora project has a certain degree of interconnectivity. That is to say,were a enroll attempt to defraud the system, there is a significantamount of data that will indicate that an anomaly is present and to beexamined. While perhaps not impossible, it would take a significantamount of computing power and finesse to spoof or swap so much data soan enrollee could be awarded GHG offset credits for work that didn'toccur.

It has also been contemplated that while the main focus of the disclosedmethod is towards greenhouse gas offset credits, there is reason tobelieve the same model can be simultaneously applied towards waterquality or even just water use reduction credits. As irrigation data(8.3) is simply another data type, as with the soil health, water usagecan also be monitored. As discussed previously, healthy soil has thebenefit of retaining water, and transfers nutrition to plants moreeasily. It would be reasonable as such to believe that as an enrollee'ssoil health improves over the course of a project, there will be areduction in water allocated to this same parcel, and potentially anyrunoff water will also be of a healthier condition. As such, there maylie the potential to award gas reduction credits, water use reductioncredits, water quality credits, and so on, all on the basis of the sameproject if the data collection is sufficient to support validity throughthis same proof of work concept.

GHG Offset Credit Certification, Issuance, and Project Closeout (1.14;FIG. 9)

In terms of whether or not a credit can be issued, the entire purpose ofthe invention is aimed at answering if a particular project met theprotocol requirements set forth (9.4) for it. This can be as simple as acomparison of most recent soil samples and their composition with therecord of the initial state of the field and the estimated state thatwould be achieved by a participant faithfully following the prescribedprotocol and using the soil amendments recommended. If the most recentsoil samples are within acceptable range of the estimated soilcomposition, then a project can be deemed a success and greenhouse gasoffset credits awarded. (9.6)

In order to do so, and because gas offsets are measured in volumetrictonnage, from the resulting soil composition and with the volume of theenrollees' parcel known, it can be recursively determined what amount ofgas reduction occurred (9.5). On the basis of this recursive calculationthen, the appropriate amount of credits can be then minted and certified(9.6) as a consequence of the successful project. Moreover, with theproject's completion, the data stream which had been allocated tocatalogue the projects data can be cleaned up and closed out (9.8), withthe final copies being appended to the data storage partition of theblockchain.

What is gained in applying the described method though is that theseparticular carbon credits which have been minted are tied to physicalprocesses which have been cataloged. Once this record is considered“fixed” on the blockchain itself, it is then also stored across aconsortium of disparate networks and devices. As was already indicatedabove, this makes fraud nearly impossible, with the final product, acarbon offset, a number meant to indicate a reduction achieved as aresult of behaviors, now being tied to verifiable physical processeswith a complete genealogy that can explain specifically where this gasreduction occurred, in what amount, how it was achieved, and even thesource of the raw materials which went into the soil amendments thathelped achieve this result. This is a significant step up from thecurrent state of carbon credits which lack any sort of chain of custodyor title, or historical record.

This carries significant value as now individual credits can be tracedand verified. Moreover, once a carbon credit is redeemed and appliedtowards someone's activities, this too can be accounted for, and acarbon credit can be indicated as exhausted on the blockchain/multichain(1.15).

In one embodiment, it may even be of benefit to tokenize the GHG offsetcredits themselves to track ownership of individual credits, to allowfor individual to individual transfer or to allow the credits to betraded the same way more familiar stocks and commodities are currentlytraded (9.7).

Having a complete historical record tied to unique GHG credits is ofcourse of significant importance to those who would be interested inpurchasing carbon offsets on an open market as a purchaser can now comeinto the market after a significant amount of time may have passed,purchase one of these offsets, and then still be able to trace andvalidate that the credit is what it purports to be and that the credithas not already been redeemed previously. In a tokenized market, creditretirement would be tied to token death, that is once redeemed, a tokencould even be directed to a “burn” address and the ability to transferany further removed entirely.

In other embodiments it may be of benefit to also track and account forweather (9.2) and its influence on final results or to separately (9.1)or additionally (9.3) also track and account for observed crop resultsto the yields the field had been producing prior to rehabilitation.

A final embodiment would again be consideration that what has been saidand applied towards GHG reduction can simultaneously apply towards wateruse, so following the same logic, comparisons of use may be made, andapplying the same principles, water reduction credits may be similarlyminted and issued with the same historical backing, with the same openmarket implications.

What is claimed:
 1. A novel humic material with green gas creditprepared by process comprising the steps a. mixing one or more portionsof Dimethylphenylpiperazinium (DMPP) with one or more portions ofN—(N-butyl) thiophosphoric triamide (NBPT) to form a portion ofnon-organic biostimulant material; b. obtaining a portion of seaweedharvest and crushing and drying said portion of seaweed to form aportion of seaweed powder; c. obtaining a portion of mined material andcrushing said portion of mined material to form a portion of humic rawmaterial; d. mixing one or more portion of animal manure with one ormore portion of stover with one or more portion of organic waste to forma portion of compositing mix and composting said compositing mix to forma portion of composted product; e. obtaining a portion of plant wasteand subjecting said portion of plant waste through an anaerobiccombustion to form a portion of bio char; f. mixing said portion of biochar with said portion of composted product with said portion of humicraw material to form a portion of humic processed material; g. mixingsaid humic processed material with said portion of non-organicbiostimulant material to form a portion of biostimulant humic product;h. adding a taggant to said portion of biostimulant humic product toform a portion of tagged biostimulant humic product; i. mixing one ormore portion of phosphorus with a portion of potassium and a portion ofnitrogen and a portion of trace minerals to form portion of rawfertilizer; j. mixing said portion of raw fertilizer with said portionof tagged biostimulant humic product to form a portion of taggedfertilized biostimulant humic product; k. analyzing said taggedfertilized biostimulant humic product and generating a tagged fertilizedbiostimulant humic product report outlining said analysis andassociating said tagged fertilized biostimulant humic product report tosaid tagged fertilized biostimulant humic product. l. identifying aportion of farmland and analyzing a portion of soil of said farmland togenerate a soil sample report of said portion of farmland andassociating said soil sample report to said portion of farmland.
 2. Theproduct of claim 1 further comprises a unique carbon credit documentgenerated by a process of applying said tagged fertilized biostimulanthumic product to said portion of farmland and grow agriculture crop onsaid portion of farmland thereby collecting a yield data of said crop togenerate a yield report and analyze said yield report to verify theapplication of said tagged fertilized biostimulant humic product bycomparing said yield report to said soil sample report and to saidfertilized biostimulant humic product report wherein said carbon creditdocument is associated with said yield report and said soil report andsaid fertilized biostimulant humic product report.
 3. The product ofclaim 1 wherein said process of forming a portion of non-organicbiostimulant material further comprising mixing with one or moreportions of Isobutylidene-diurea (IBDU).
 4. The product of claim 3wherein said process of forming a portion of non-organic biostimulantmaterial further comprising mixing with one or more portions ofPolyaspartic Acid.
 5. The product of claim 4 wherein said process offorming a portion of non-organic biostimulant material furthercomprising mixing with one or more portions of Chitosan.
 6. The productof claim 5 wherein said process of forming a portion of non-organicbiostimulant material further comprising mixing with one or moreportions of Mycorrhizae.
 7. The product of claim 6 wherein said processof forming a portion of non-organic biostimulant material furthercomprising mixing with one or more portions of Rhizobia.
 8. The productof claim 1 wherein said mined material is selected from a groupconsisting of Leonardite, oxidized lignite, carbonaceous shales, andhumates.
 9. The product of claim 1 wherein in said method of associatingsaid report to said tagged fertilized biostimulant humic product isselected from a group consisting of utilizing blockchain datasynchronization and utilizing multichain data synchronization.
 10. Theproduct of claim 1 wherein in said method of associating said report tosaid tagged fertilized biostimulant humic product is selected from agroup consisting of utilizing blockchain data synchronization andutilizing multichain data synchronization.
 11. The product of claim 2wherein said process of associating said carbon credit document saidyield report and said soil report and said fertilized biostimulant humicproduct report is selected from a group consisting of utilizingblockchain data synchronization and utilizing multichain datasynchronization.